Missing Adults: Background, Federal Programs, and Issues for Congress

Missing Adults: Background, Federal Programs,
and Issues for Congress
Updated October 15, 2008
Adrienne L. Fernandes
Analyst in Social Policy
Domestic Social Policy Division

Missing Adults: Background, Federal Programs,
and Issues for Congress
Summary
Adults may go missing due to choice, an abduction, foul play, a mental or
physical disability, or a natural catastrophe, among other reasons. Although no
accurate estimates exist of the number of missing adults, the Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI) reported that as of January 1, 2008, over 50,000 missing adult
cases were pending in the National Crime Information System (NCIC), a federal
computerized index with data on crimes and locator files for missing and unidentified
persons. Certain adults are particularly vulnerable to missing episodes; for example,
those with dementia are at risk for wandering. Adults who engage in high-risk
behaviors, including involvement in gang activity, may also be more prone to going
missing.
Unlike children, adults have the legal right to go missing under most
circumstances. As a result, families of missing adults may receive limited assistance
from state and local law enforcement entities in recovering their loved ones. The
federal government has not been involved in assisting law enforcement entities with
missing adult cases in the same way it has with missing children cases. Further, cases
of missing children and young adults under the age of 21 must be reported to the
NCIC, while reporting missing adults to the database is voluntary. In recent years,
however, the federal government has increasingly played a role in (1) preventing
certain types of missing adult incidents and (2) working to recover adults who go
missing, including those who are deceased and for whom only remains can be found.
Recognizing the needs of a growing aging population, Congress authorized
funding for the Missing Alzheimer’s Disease Patient Alert program under the Violent
Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (P.L. 103-322). The program has
awarded funds to the Alzheimer’s Association of America since FY1996 to protect
and locate missing individuals with dementia through a patient identification
program, as well as outreach and education efforts. In 2000, Congress passed
Kristen’s Act (P.L. 106-468) to permit the Department of Justice (DOJ) to make
grants to establish a national clearinghouse for missing adults and provide technical
assistance to law enforcement agencies in locating these individuals. From FY2002
through FY2006, DOJ made grants to the National Center for Missing Adults
(NCMA) for these purposes. Both DOJ and NCMA have established databases to
collect and disseminate information to law enforcement on missing adults, their
relatives, and unidentified human remains. The President’s DNA Initiative has also
supported efforts to recover missing persons and identify unidentified human remains
by funding DNA analysis and providing technical assistance on using this analysis.
Policymakers and other stakeholders have increasingly focused on two issues
related to adults who go missing: whether to provide federal assistance to states and
localities to develop alert systems and technology to locate missing adults; and
possibly expanding federal involvement in cases of missing adults with diminished
mental capacity. Another issue is the coordination of the databases on missing
persons. This report will be updated as events warrant.

Contents
In troduction ......................................................1
Why Do Adults Go Missing?.........................................2
Data on Missing Adults and Unidentified Decedents......................3
National Crime Information Center Missing Person and
Unidentified Person Files ...................................4
Missing Person Data for 2007................................5
Unidentified Missing Persons................................6
National DNA Index System.....................................7
The National Missing and Unidentified Persons System................8
National Center for Missing Adults Database.......................10
Comparison and Interaction of Databases..........................11
Federal Role in Recovering Missing Adults............................12
The President’s DNA Initiative and Related Activities................13
National Missing Person’s Taskforce.............................14
Missing Alzheimer’s Disease Patient Alert Program.................14
Reauthorization Activity in the 110^th Congress..................15
Safe Return Program......................................16
Kristen’s Act................................................17^th
Reauthorization Activity in the 110 Congress..................17
Overview of Services Provided by the National Center
for Missing Adults....................................18
National Center for Missing and Exploited Children .................21
Issues ..........................................................21
Coordination of Federally Funded Databases on Missing Persons
and Unidentified Decedents ................................22
Alert Systems................................................22
Silver or Senior Alerts.....................................22
Alert Notices by Phone....................................24
Tracking Technology......................................25
Special Federal Protections for Vulnerable Missing Adults............26
Appendix .......................................................28
List of Tables
Table 1: Appropriations for Missing Alzheimer’s Disease
Patient Alert Program, FY2002 through FY2008 ....................15
Table 2: Appropriations for Kristen’s Act Grants, FY2002 through FY2008...17
Table A-1: National Crime Information Center (NCIC):
Missing Entries of Adults Ages 18 and Older, 2007..................28
Table A-2: Databases of Missing Adults and Unidentified Remains.........29

Missing Adults: Background, Federal
Programs, and Issues for Congress
Introduction
Adults may go missing due to choice; an abduction or foul play; a physical or
developmental disability; a natural catastrophe that displaces individuals, such as
Hurricanes Katrina and Rita; and certain high-risk behaviors, including gang
involvement or drug use, among other circumstances.
State and local laws govern how criminal justice entities respond to missing
adult cases. This response is complicated by a number of factors. Unlike children,
adults have the legal right to go missing in most cases and may do so to seek¹
protection from a domestic abuser and other related reasons. Further, law
enforcement agencies may be hesitant to devote resources to missing adult cases,
given competing priorities. Law enforcement agencies within and across states also
respond differently to missing adult cases. Some states mandate that law enforcement
officials take reports without a waiting period, while other states require at least a 24-
hour waiting period after the person is believed to be missing.²
The federal government has not been involved in assisting state and local law
enforcement entities with missing adult cases in the same way it has with missing
children cases. Federal law requires law enforcement to report missing children and
young adults under the age of 21 to the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI)
National Crime Information Center (NCIC), a federal database of crime and missing
person information; reporting missing adults to the database is voluntary. In
addition, since 1985, Congress has appropriated funding to the Missing and
Exploited Children’s Program to coordinate a federal response to missing children
cases and to create and maintain a national clearinghouse that assists law³
enforcement and families with these cases.
In recent years, the federal government has increasingly played a role in both (1)
preventing certain types of missing adult incidents and (2) recovering adults who go
missing, including those who are deceased and for whom only remains provide clues
to their identity and circumstances surrounding their disappearance. In 1994,

¹ Guardians and the court system may limit the autonomy of some adults through
conservatorship or guardianship arrangements.
² For differences among some states regarding waiting periods for taking reports, see
[ ht t p: / / www.f i nd-t he-mi ssi ng.or g/ st at es/ i ndex.ht m] .
³ For further information, see CRS Report RL34050, Missing and Exploited Children:
Background, Policies, and Issues, by Adrienne L. Fernandes.

Congress authorized the Missing Alzheimer’s Disease Patient Alert program under
the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (P.L. 103-322) to assist
in locating missing individuals with Alzheimer’s disease and other forms of dementia
through a patient identification program, as well as outreach and education efforts.
In 2000, Congress authorized the Department of Justice (DOJ), through Kristen’s Act
(P.L. 106-468), to make grants to establish a national clearinghouse for missing
adults and provide technical assistance to law enforcement agencies in locating
missing adults. The federal government has also supported efforts to establish
databases to track and identify missing adults, their relatives, and unidentified human
remains. Some advocates of missing adults and policymakers have called for the
federal government to expand its role in missing adult cases. For example, these
advocates and policymakers would like the federal government to assist states by
creating or expanding missing adult alert programs that serve as a warning to the
public about cases of missing adults, much like the AMBER (America’s Missing:
Broadcast Emergency Response) Alert program for missing children.
The first section of this report discusses demographics and record keeping of
missing adults and unidentified remains, and some of the factors that may contribute
to the disappearance of adults. This section also discusses federally funded databases
that are used to track data on missing adults and unidentified individuals. The second
section of the report describes the federal programs and initiatives to assist in
locating missing adults, including funding data for FY2002 through FY2008, where
applicable. (No final action has been taken to fund these activities for FY2009.)
Finally, the third section discusses issues about the federal role in missing adult
cases.
Why Do Adults Go Missing?
Certain circumstances can make adults vulnerable to going missing. Adults may
go missing because of an abduction or foul play. A physical or developmental
disability or cognitive disorder, such as Alzheimer’s disease and other forms of
dementia, may also contribute to a missing episode. Adults with dementia have been
identified as high-risk for going missing by advocates for older adults. According to
the Alzheimer’s Association, as many as five million people in the U.S. suffer from
Alzheimer’s disease and related dementia, and about 60% of those will wander away
from their homes or health care facilities.⁴ Further, a natural catastrophe can displace
individuals and make their whereabouts unknown to others. Approximately 13,000
adults were reported missing in the days following Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in⁵

2005. Finally, other adults vulnerable to missing incidents may include those with

⁴ Ashlen Anderson, Issue Kit: Public Policy Responses to Wandering Behavior,”
Alzheimer’s Association of America, September 2006. (Hereafter referenced Ashlen
Anderson, Public Policy Responses to Wandering Behavior.) For a discussion of the
incidence and prevalence of Alzheimer’s disease, see CRS Report RL32970, Biomedical
Advances in Alzheimer’s Disease, by Michele M. Schoonmaker and Laura B. Shrestha.
⁵ This information was provided to the Congressional Research Service by the National
Center for Missing Adults on May 1, 2008.

high-risk lifestyles, such as individuals who abuse drugs or are gang involved, and
those that have a history of victimization, including domestic violence.⁶
Data on Missing Adults
and Unidentified Decedents
There is no definitive estimate of the number of adults who go missing, because
some adults are not known to be missing or are not reported to databases that compile
data on missing persons. However, three federally supported data sources provide
some insight into this number: the Missing Person File at the FBI’s National Crime
Information Center; the FBI’s National DNA Index System (NDIS), which stores
information on offenders and arrestees, forensic evidence, as well as individuals
believed to be missing, their relatives, and unidentified human remains; and the
National Missing and Unidentified Persons System (NamUs), administered by DOJ’s
National Institute of Justice (NIJ). The National Center for Missing Adults (NCMA),
a clearinghouse in Glendale, Arizona, that assists the families of missing adults and
law enforcement agencies, also has a database on missing adults; NCMA was funded
with a DOJ grant authorized by Kristen’s Act from FY2002 through FY2006.
Profiles of missing individuals entered into one database do not necessarily populate
other databases, although some missing individuals may be reported to more than one
of the databases. Therefore, numbers of missing persons should not be added across
any of the databases.
The NCIC Unidentified Person File, NamUs, and NDIS contain information
about unidentified decedents. However, the true number of unidentified missing adult
cases is unknown because remains can go undiscovered, or if they are recovered, they
may not be reported to the databases or retained. In a census conducted by DOJ in
2004, medical examiners and coroners reported a total of 13,486 unidentified human
remains on record, though about 51% of medical examiner and coroners’ offices
lacked policies for retaining records such as x-rays, DNA, or fingerprints that could
identify missing individuals.⁷ (The report also found that 90% of offices serving large
jurisdictions did retain such records.) Further, medical examiners and coroners
estimated that about 4,400 unidentified human decedents were reported in an average
year, with approximately 1,000 (23.0%) remaining unidentified after one year.
Another DOJ study estimated, using death records reported to the Centers for Disease
Control from 1980 through 2004, that as many as 10,300 of these records were for
unidentified decedents. This number is an approximation, as states do not uniformly
specify on the death certificate when a person’s identity is not known.⁸ In addition,

⁶ These groups have been identified as vulnerable to going missing by the National Center
for Missing Adults.
⁷ Matthew J. Hickman et al., Medical Examiners and Coroners’ Offices, 2004, U.S.
Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, June 2007, at [http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/
bj s/pub/pdf/meco04.pdf].
⁸ Kristen Hughes, Unidentified Human Remains in the United States, U.S. Department of
Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, November 2007, at [http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/

the criteria used by DOJ to search the death records may have included individuals
whose identities were known, as well as unidentified individuals who were later
identified.
The discussion below will show that the databases range in the number of
profiles they contain, as well as the type of information they collect (e.g., basic
demographic profiles, DNA profiles, etc.). The discussion also raises the question
about whether these databases can, or should, share data or indicate that data about
an individual profile is available in another database (some cross-referencing
between the databases now occurs, though on a limited basis).
National Crime Information Center Missing Person
and Unidentified Person Files
The NCIC within the FBI’s Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS)⁹
Division maintains statistics on missing adults and unidentified decedents. The
NCIC is a computerized index of documented information concerning crimes and
criminals of nationwide interest and a locator file for missing and unidentified
persons. Since October 1, 1975, the NCIC has maintained records of missing persons
(known as the Missing Person File) who are reported to the FBI by federal, state, and
local law enforcement agencies, foreign criminal justice agencies, and authorized
courts. The Missing Person File was created in response to a request in 1974 from
the NCIC Advisory Policy Board (APB).¹⁰ The APB is composed of local, state, and
federal criminal justice and national security agencies and advises the FBI on
criminal justice information matters. The Missing Person File includes records for
individuals who are missing because they
^!have a proven physical or mental disability,
^!are missing under circumstances indicating that they may be in
physical danger,
^!are missing under circumstances indicating their disappearance may
not have been voluntary,
^!are under the age of 21 and do not meet the above criteria,

⁸ (...continued)
pdf/uhrus04.pdf].
⁹ Unless otherwise noted, this information was provided to the Congressional Research
Service by the U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Criminal Justice
Information Services Division on January 25, 2008. For further information about the
current NCIC Advisory Policy Board, see [http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cjisd/advisorypolicy
board.htm]. The FBI is authorized to maintain the NCIC under 28 U.S.C. 434.
¹⁰ The Missing Children Act of 1982 affirmed the need for the Missing Person File by
requiring the FBI to “acquire, collect, classify, and preserve any information which would
assist in the location of any missing person (including an unemancipated person as defined
by the laws of the places of residence of such person) and provide confirmation as to any
entry for such a person to the parent, legal guardian, or next of kin of that person.” 28
U.S.C. 534(a). The FBI amended NCIC entry procedures in May 1999 to replace the phrase
“unemancipated person” with “a person who is missing under the age of 18.”

^! are missing after a catastrophe, or
^!are 21 and older and do not meet any of the above criteria but for
whom there is a reasonable concern for their safety.
These categories are presented in further detail in Table A-1 in the Appendix.
Pursuant to the National Child Search Assistance Act of 1990 (Title XXXVII of the
Crime Control Act of 1990, P.L. 101-647), records of missing children under age 18
must be immediately entered into the Missing Person File. The act also requires the
Attorney General to publish an annual statistical summary of the Missing Person File.
Suzanne’s Law, under the Prosecutorial Remedies and Other Tools to End the
Exploitation of Children Today Act of 2003 (PROTECT Act, P.L. 108-21), requires
law enforcement to also immediately submit information about missing adults to the
NCIC ages 18 through 20. Law enforcement agencies are not mandated under federal
law to submit missing person records of adults over the age of 21 into the Missing
Person File. Therefore, although records of missing adults are captured, the NCIC
does not include the complete number of adults who go missing and are not reported
to the database.
Missing Person Data for 2007.¹¹ In calendar year 2007, approximately
815,000 individuals of all ages were reported missing to the NCIC. Also in that same
year, approximately 820,000 missing person records were cleared or canceled; some
of these records were entered prior to 2007. Of all individuals reported missing in
2007, over 171,000 (about 21.0%) were ages 18 and older. Table A-1 summarizes
the number of missing cases entered in 2007 for individuals ages 18 and older under
the six missing person categories. Nearly half of all missing adult cases involved
persons missing under circumstances suggesting that they might be endangered. The
next highest number of missing adults went missing for another, unspecified reason,
but for whom there was a reasonable concern for their safety.
Of all adults ages 18 and older reported missing in 2007, most were male —
57.1% — compared to 42.9% who were female.¹² The majority (67.9%) of missing
adults were white, followed by individuals who were black (25.9%), of an unknown
race (2.7%), Asian (2.6%), and American Indian or Alaskan Native (0.9%). African
Americans appear to be overrepresented compared to their share of the general
population by more than ten percentage points.¹³ The NCIC does not report on the
Hispanic origin of missing individuals, and NCIC users are instructed to enter records
for Hispanic individuals using the race code (American Indian or Alaskan Native,

¹¹ Unless otherwise noted, this information was provided to the Congressional Research
Service by the U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Criminal Justice
Information Services Division on May 6, 2008.
¹² The gender of three individuals was unknown.
¹³ For information about demographics of the general population, see U.S. Department of
Commerce. Census Bureau. Overview of Race and Hispanic Origin. Census 2000 Brief.
March 2001.

Asian or Pacific Islander, black, or white) that most closely represents that individual
as perceived by the law enforcement official.¹⁴
As of January 1, 2008, there were 105,229 individual records (entered in 2007
and other years) remaining in the Missing Person File.¹⁵ Of these, 50,581 (48.1%)
were for missing adults ages 18 and older.
Unidentified Missing Persons. Some individuals who go missing may be
deceased, and their remains, intact or not, may be the only available clues concerning
their identity and circumstances surrounding their disappearance. Since 1983, the
NCIC has taken reports of unidentified missing persons, pursuant to the passage of
the Missing Children Act of 1982 (P.L 97-292). The act required the FBI to “acquire,
collect, classify, and preserve any information which would assist in the
identification of any deceased individual who has not been identified after the¹⁶
discovery of such deceased individual.” Pursuant to this requirement, reports are
taken of unidentified deceased persons, persons of any age who are living and unable
to determine their identity, and unidentified catastrophe victims. Reports may
include information about bodies found shortly after death, when a persons’ remains
may be fairly intact, as well as skeletal remains.
As of January 1, 2008, information on 6,945 unidentified persons were recorded
in NCIC. Of these, 1,788 (25.7%) were entered in 2007. Nearly all (6,822) of the
active entries were for deceased unidentified bodies; the remaining were for
unidentified catastrophe victims and living persons who could not be identified,
either because they could not identify themselves or refused to disclose their identity.
Also in 2007, nearly 1,000 records were canceled or cleared by a law enforcement
agency for such reasons as the subject being identified or the records being invalid.
The total number of unidentified persons in the NCIC may represent just a fraction
of the true number of missing remains.

¹⁴ In October 1997, the Office of Management and Budget published revised standards for
the reporting by federal agencies of statistics on race and ethnicity. The standards specify
the racial categories of American Indian or Alaska Native, black or African American,
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and white; and ethnic categories of Hispanic or
Latino and Not Hispanic or Latino. However, the FBI received an exemption from this
reporting requirement for the NCIC. According to the FBI, states are not required to comply
with the racial and ethnic classifications, due to the uniqueness of crime data and the fact
that the data are reported by state and local jurisdictions. This information was provided to
the Congressional Research Service by the U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of
Investigation, Criminal Justice Information Services Division on May 6, 2008.
¹⁵ This information was provided to the Congressional Research Service by the U.S.
Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Criminal Justice Information
Services Division on May 23, 2008.
¹⁶ 28 U.S.C. 534(a).

National DNA Index System¹⁷
A second federally funded database that stores DNA records on missing adults
and unidentified remains, NDIS, was authorized under the DNA Identification Act
of 1994 as part the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (P.L.
103-322). P.L. 103-322 specified that the FBI could establish an index of DNA
identification records of persons convicted of crimes, analyses of DNA samples
recovered from crime scenes, and analyses from unidentified human remains.¹⁸ A
fourth category of records for relatives of missing persons was added in 1999 by the
Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-113). DNA laboratories may
enter DNA information into NDIS that involves one of the four categories of records,
as well as the records of missing adults. The data are first entered by authorized
users into the Local DNA Index System (LDIS), which can then populate the central
laboratory for each state, known as a State DNA Index System (SDIS). Only SDIS
laboratories may upload DNA profiles directly to the NDIS. LDIS or SDIS
laboratories can conduct searches of their own databases prior to uploading the data
to NDIS. Searches of data entered by other states into NDIS are conducted by the
FBI Laboratory, which automatically searches new DNA data when profiles are
submitted by the states.
NDIS contains over six million profiles in five databases: offenders and
arrestees database, forensic evidence database, missing unidentified human remains
database, missing person database, and biological relatives of missing persons
database.¹⁹ The three missing person databases are part of the FBI Laboratory’s
National Missing Person DNA Database (NMPDD) program, which works to
identify missing and unidentified persons based on available DNA profiles and other
clues.²⁰ The unidentified human remains database contains DNA profiles from the
remains of individuals that cannot be identified by fingerprint; dental, medical, or
anthropological examinations; and of individuals who are living, but are
unidentifiable using typical investigative methods (e.g., children and others who
cannot or refuse to identify themselves). The relatives of missing persons database
contains DNA profiles that are voluntarily submitted by the relatives of known
missing individuals. Finally, the missing person database contains DNA records of

¹⁷ Unless otherwise noted, this information was provided to the Congressional Research
Service by the U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Office of
Congressional Affairs on June 18, 2008, and July 16, 2008.
¹⁸ According to the FBI, the authority to include DNA from missing persons is derived from
P.L. 103-322, because in order to identify unidentified remains, a search of missing person
records must be conducted that compares those records to the records for unidentified
remains. This information was provided to the Congressional Research Service by the
Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Office of Congressional Affairs on
August 8, 2008.
¹⁹ The other two databases, the convicted offender database and forensic database, can be
searched against one another to assist law enforcement personnel in solving crimes.
²⁰ In addition to conducting DNA analysis, the FBI Laboratory also assists state and local
law enforcement agencies with investigations of missing persons involving examinations
of anthropology, trace evidence, facial reconstruction, fingerprinting, and toolmarking.
These services are provided at no cost.

missing persons obtained from their belongings or derived from the profiles of their
relatives.
The three missing persons databases can be searched against one another. The
Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) is the software in NDIS that compares
various DNA profiles, and if a match is made between two sets of DNA profiles, the
software sends an electronic message to the laboratories that contributed the samples.
DNA analysts at the laboratories review the data to confirm the match. The
laboratories are responsible for alerting the investigating law enforcement agency,
medical examiner, coroner, or medical-legal authority of the results. The FBI is
continuing to develop technology, including software to conduct kinship DNA
analyses, and is using meta-data (e.g., sex, date of last sighting, and age), that is
intended to assist in locating missing persons.²¹
Most of the DNA profiles are those stored in criminal and forensic evidence
databases. As of July 2008, NDIS contained the DNA profiles from 528 missing
persons; 4,641 biological relatives of missing persons; and 1,600 unidentified human
remains; 6.1 million offenders and arrestees; and 227,048 forensic-related profiles.
The FBI does not maintain statistics on the number of samples or profiles maintained
in the LDIS or SDIS.
The National Missing and Unidentified Persons System²²
NamUs was established in July 2007 as an online repository for information
about missing persons and unidentified remains.²³ The system was created as part
of the President’s DNA Initiative,²⁴ described below, out of concern that state and
local law enforcement agencies, medical examiners, and coroners are not required to
report missing adult and unidentified decedent cases to the NCIC, and therefore, the
true number of missing adults is unknown.²⁵ To further investigate this issue, DOJ
appointed an expert panel of medical examiners and coroners, which ultimately
confirmed the need for a central reporting system for unidentified human remains.
These efforts also led DOJ to establish and fund NamUs. NamUs is composed of
two databases, one for missing persons and the other for unidentified remains.

²¹ U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, “CODIS: Combined DNA
Index System,” at [http://www.fbi.gov/hq/lab/pdf/codisbrochure.pdf].
²² Unless otherwise noted, this information is provided by U.S. Department of Justice,
“About Missing Persons Database,” NamUs, at [http://www.namus.gov/index.htm].
²³ According to the Department of Justice, there is no specific statutory authority for
NamUs; however, the agency derives its authority to establish the database from statutes on
the general authorities of the National Institute of Justice (NIJ, 42 U.S.C. 3721-3723), which
manages the database, to support research and develop tools and technologies, as well as
statutes concerning the general authorities of NIJ’s Office of Science and Technology (6
U.S.C. 161-165). This information was provided to the Congressional Research Service by
the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs on June 16, 2008.
²⁴ The President’s DNA Initiative was created under President George W. Bush.
²⁵ U.S. Department of Justice, “About Missing Persons Database,” NamUs, at
[http://www.namus.gov/index.htm] .

The Missing Person Database is under construction; the site currently includes
information about each state’s statutes on recovering missing persons as well as links
to state missing person clearinghouses, which are maintained by state law
enforcement agencies or advocacy organizations and provide information about
missing adults. The Unidentified Remains Database is available for medical
examiners and coroners to upload their cases.²⁶ Website users — members of the
public, law enforcement, coroners, and medical examiners — may view profiles of
the unidentified remains; however, only law enforcement agencies and other
authorized entities may enter information and review additional information and
photographs that are not available to the public. Some of the profiles are fully intact,
whereas others include pieces of the missing person’s body or information about the
remains and where they were found. Users can also search based on characteristics
such as demographics, anthropologic analysis, the NCIC record number, dental
information, and distinct body features. DOJ anticipates that the two databases will
be linked in 2009, and law enforcement and the public will be able to search for
matches between missing persons and unidentified decedent records.
During the development of NamUs, representatives from NDIS, NCIC, the
Violent Criminal Apprehension Program (ViCAP), described below, and Integrated
Automated Fingerprint Identification System (IAFIS), described below, were
involved as partners in working groups and focus groups that developed requirements
for the system.²⁷ Also, according to DOJ, state and local practitioners participated
in developing the requirements of the system and made recommendations for specific
technology upgrades that were incorporated. The database was funded in FY2007
with $2.5 million from DOJ’s Justice Assistance account and $500,000 from the
Community Oriented Policing (COPS) account.²⁸ The Justice Assistance funds were
awarded to the National Forensic Science Technology Center to develop the Missing
Person Database and to implement NamUs. The COPS funds were awarded to the
University of Central Florida’s National Center for Forensic Science to complete the
development of the Unidentified Decedent Database and to administer the database
for 18 months.

²⁶ The database was initially developed in 2005 and 2006 as a public service project by the
National Association of Medical Examiners, Occupational Research and Assessment, Inc.
(ORAINC), and the International Association of Coroners and Medical Examiners.
²⁷ This information was provided to the Congressional Research Service by the U.S.
Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs on June 16, 2008.
²⁸ Congress specified in the Science, State, Justice, Commerce, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act of 2006 (P.L. 109-108) that funds from the COPS account were to be
used for “a DNA analysis and capacity enhancement program, and for other state, local, and
federal forensic activities.” The Revised Continuing Appropriations Resolution of 2007
(P.L. 110-5) continued funding for these activities.

National Center for Missing Adults Database²⁹
The National Center for Missing Adults has received funding from DOJ for its
efforts to work on behalf of missing adults and their families, as described below.
NCMA maintains a database of the number of adults who are reported missing to the
organization by family members or law enforcement. The organization takes reports
of missing adults from family members after reports have first been made to law
enforcem ent .³⁰
According to NCMA, from 2003 through April 2008, the organization received
nearly 25,200 reports of missing persons ages 18 and older. Of these entries, about
70.0% have been resolved and about 30.0% are pending. Most of the missing
individuals entered into the database since 2003 are women (60.7%). These figures
differ from those reported to the Missing Person File, which consists mostly of
missing adult profiles for males (57.1%). Non-Hispanic whites comprise the largest
share (42.1%) of individuals entered into the database, followed by Hispanics
(26.2%),³¹ non-Hispanic blacks (21%), and other racial groups (11.0%). These
figures suggest that non-Hispanic blacks and Hispanics appear to be overrepresented
relative to their share of the general U.S. population of approximately 12.0% each.³²
Note, however, that these figures may not be representative of the racial and ethnic
composition of missing persons generally because the true number of missing adults
is unknown.
In 2005, NCMA added several collection fields to its missing person database
to include such characteristics as disabilities, history of domestic violence,
homelessness, missing from group homes, and other categories. Among the 3,921
missing adults since 2005 who have been reported to have disabilities, nearly 1,800
(about 45.0%) had a diagnosed medical condition that required care or medication.
About 1,300 (or 35.0%) had a mental illness or diminished mental capacity, which
includes general depression, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), bipolar
disorder, schizophrenia, attention deficit (hyperactivity) disorder, autism, and other
genetic conditions. The balance had Alzheimer’s disease or related dementia (about
8.0%), alcohol or chemical dependency (about 7.0%), or another unspecified
disability (about 5.0%). Data are not available for characteristics other than
disabilities.

²⁹ This information was provided to the Congressional Research Service by the National
Center for Missing Adults on May 1, 2008.
³⁰ For further information about the reporting process, see [http://www.theyaremissed.org/
ncma /content.php?webid=search].
³¹ Hispanic includes individuals who were entered into the database as “Hispanic,” “white
Hispanic,” or “black Hispanic.”
³² For information about demographics of the general population, see U.S. Department of
Treasury. Census Bureau. Overview of Race and Hispanic Origin. Census 2000 Brief.
March 2001.

Other Federal Databases that Can Store Information
About Missing Persons

Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System (IAFIS): IAFIS is an
electronic database that stores information on fingerprints and corresponding criminal
histories. This information is submitted voluntarily by state, local, and federal law
enforcement agencies. The database includes more than 55 million subjects in its
Criminal Master File; nearly 50 records are for missing persons. Law enforcement
agencies that submit electronic fingerprints receive electronic responses to criminal
ten-print fingerprint submissions within two hours and within 24 hours for civil
fingerprint submissions (i.e., background checks for employment and other non-
criminal justice related purposes). The response indicates whether an individual has a
criminal history. IAFIS is administered by the FBI’s Criminal Justice Information
Services Division. For more information, see [http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cjisd/iafis.htm].
Violent Criminal Apprehension Program (ViCAP): ViCAP is a data center that
collects and analyzes information on crimes, including missing person cases where the
circumstances indicate a strong possibility of foul play and the victim is still missing.
However, few missing adult cases are actually entered because, according to the FBI,
the NCIC does not automatically populate the ViCAP database. Cases with an arrested
or identified offender can be entered into the ViCAP system by law enforcement
investigators for database comparison and possible matching with unsolved cases. Once
a case is entered into the ViCAP database, it is compared continuously against all other
entries on the basis of certain aspects of the crime. The purpose of this process is to
detect signature aspects and traits of the crime to allow ViCAP personnel with the
FBI’s Criminal Justice Information Services Division to identify crimes that have been
committed by the same offender. For additional information, see [http://www.fbi.gov/
hq/isd/ciirg/ncavc.htm# vicap].
Source: Congressional Research Service.
The database also includes data fields to indicate if the investigating law
enforcement agency or medical examiner has DNA samples or dental records.³³
(NCMA previously worked with families of missing adults to collect reference
samples.)
Comparison and Interaction of Databases
Table A-2 in the Appendix summarizes some of the features of the databases
on missing persons and unidentified remains, as well as the entities that may access
them. As described above, NDIS includes DNA profiles and IAFIS includes
fingerprint records, whereas some of the other databases only indicate whether these
records are available. These other databases also tend to include more general
information about missing persons and the circumstances surrounding their
disappearance. Further, IAFIS and ViCAP have a broader mandate to store criminal
justice-related data and do not focus, per se, on missing adult cases. None of the
³³ This information was provided to the Congressional Research Service by the National
Center for Missing Adults on July 14, 2008.

databases is linked or populate one another.³⁴ This has been identified as a concern
of DOJ’s National Missing Persons Taskforce.
Records are submitted to most of the databases by authorized law enforcement
agencies, state missing persons clearinghouses, medical examiners and coroners, or
DNA laboratories. Nearly all of the databases can be accessed exclusively by the
federal government or authorized law enforcement and other personnel; however,
records in NamUs and the NCMA database can also be reviewed by the public,
though sometimes only on a limited basis for NamUs.
Federal Role in Recovering Missing Adults
Efforts to recover missing adults are primarily under the jurisdiction of state and
local governments. These efforts may be complicated by a number of factors. Unlike
children, adults have the legal right to go missing in most cases and can do so to seek
protection from a domestic abuser and other reasons.³⁵ Further, law enforcement
agencies may be hesitant to devote resources to missing adult cases given competing
priorities. In addition, law enforcement agencies within and across states respond
differently to missing adult cases. Some states mandate that law enforcement officials
take reports without a waiting period, whereas other states require at least a 24-hour³⁶
waiting period after the person is believed to be missing.
In recent years, the federal government has increasingly played a role both in
preventing certain types of missing adult incidents and in working to recover adults
who go missing, including those who are deceased and for whom only remains
provide clues to the circumstances surrounding their disappearance. In addition to
funding or operating databases that track information about missing adults and
unidentified remains, the federal government has undertaken other related efforts,
including support for (1) the President’s DNA Initiative, which has focused on
identifying the remains of unidentified deceased individuals; (2) National Missing
Persons Task Force, with its emphasis on achieving greater cooperation among the
various federal databases; (3) the Missing Alzheimer’s Disease Patient Alert program
to prevent missing episodes and locate missing individuals with Alzheimer’s disease
and related dementia; (4) activities funded under Kristen’s Act to locate missing
adults; and (5) the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC),
which works to recover missing children and adults ages 18 to 21 who are reported
to the agency as missing by law enforcement officials. The Missing Alzheimer’s
Disease Patient Alert program and activities funded under Kristen’s Act have
specifically received congressional appropriations for missing adult activities. The

³⁴ This may be due, in part, to concerns with protecting the privacy of individuals registered
in the databases. For example, the DNA Identification Act of 1994 (P.L. 103-322) limit the
accessibility of the profiles in NDIS for certain purposes.
³⁵ Guardians and the court system may limit the autonomy of some adults through
conservatorship or guardianship arrangements.
³⁶ For differences among some states regarding waiting periods for taking reports, see
[ ht t p: / / www.f i nd-t he-mi ssi ng.or g/ st at es/ i ndex.ht m] .

other activities have been funded under appropriations for initiatives or programs that
encompass more than missing adult activities.
The President’s DNA Initiative and Related Activities
In March 2003, President George W. Bush announced a new DNA Initiative to
promote the use of forensic DNA technology to solve crimes, protect individuals
from wrongful prosecution, and identify missing persons.³⁷ Congress has
appropriated funding to DOJ to carry out the following activities to assist with
locating missing adults and unidentified remains:³⁸
^!sample analysis of unidentified human remains and family reference
samples;³⁹
^!standardized sample DNA collection kits for unidentified remains of
missing persons;
^!evaluation and implementation of advanced DNA technologies to
facilitate the analysis of skeletal remains;
^!focus group on using DNA technology to assist the identification of
human remains;
^!training and technical assistance on using DNA to identify missing
persons and unidentified remains (see below);
^!census of medical examiners and coroners and inventory of
unidentified remains; and
^!NamUs Unidentified Decedent Database.
Each of these activities has been funded in one or more years from FY2004 through
FY2008. No final action has been taken to fund these activities in FY2009. Congress
has passed, and the President has enacted, a continuing resolution for FY2009 (P.L.
110-329), which, for many programs, provides for the same level of funding as in
FY2008. The resolution extends until March 9, 2009, and does not reflect final
funding levels for FY2009.

³⁷ For additional information about the President’s DNA Initiative, see CRS Report
RL33489, An Overview and Funding History of Select Department of Justice (DOJ) Grant
Programs, by Nathan James.
³⁸ The Justice for All Act of 2004 (P.L. 108-405) authorized funding for DNA technology
to meet some of the activities set forth in the President’s DNA Initiative. Sec. 308 of the act
provides that the Attorney General may use DNA technology to identify missing persons
and unidentified human remains. Sec. 308 further requires that each state or unit of local
government that receives funding under the section is required to submit the DNA profiles
of missing persons and unidentified human remains to the NDIS national missing persons
database. According to the Department of Justice, no specific appropriation has been made
pursuant to this section of the act.
³⁹ Laboratories that participate in NDIS conduct these sample analyses, and the DNA results
are forwarded to the relevant missing person indexes in NDIS.

Also as part of the DNA Initiative, DOJ held two regional missing person
forums and the First National Strategy Meeting on Identifying the Missing in 2005.⁴⁰
(No other national meetings have been held to date.) The forums provided attendees,
including medical examiners, coroners, law enforcement personnel, managers of state
missing children clearinghouses, family members of missing persons, forensic
scientists, and policymakers, with information about resources to solve missing
person and unidentified human remains cases in their jurisdictions. The forums
addressed topics including model state programs for recovering missing persons and
unidentified remains, reference sample DNA collection kits, and evidence
repositories. The national strategy meeting was convened with the same groups of
attendees described above to identify policies and practices, including the use of
DNA, to solve missing person and unidentified decedent cases. The Task Force also
created model state legislation to encourage states to adopt laws that improve the
ability of law enforcement to locate and return missing persons, identify human
remains, and provide timely information to family members of missing persons.⁴¹
National Missing Person’s Taskforce⁴²
As part of the President’s DNA Initiative, in 2005, NIJ and FBI were directed
by DOJ leadership to establish a national task force to assess how to better
encourage, facilitate, and achieve greater use of federal missing person databases to
solve missing persons cases and identify human remains. In response to this
directive, NIJ and the FBI convened the National Missing Persons Taskforce,
composed of a broad cross-section of criminal justice officials, forensic science
experts, and victim advocates. The task force met July 2005 through January 2006
to address, among other issues, the federal databases that store information on
missing persons and unidentified human remains. According to DOJ, members of the
task force convened these meetings to better understand and improve the information
sharing tools and DNA technologies available to solve cases involving missing
persons and unidentified decedents.
Missing Alzheimer’s Disease Patient Alert Program⁴³
The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (P.L. 103-322)
authorized the Missing Alzheimer’s Disease Patient Alert program to provide grants
to locally based organizations to protect and locate missing patients with Alzheimer’s
disease and related dementia. Funding was authorized at $900,000 for each of
FY1996, FY1997, and FY1998. Congress has appropriated funding for the program
from FY1996 through FY2008. These funds, administered by DOJ’s Office of
Justice Programs, have been awarded to the Alzheimer’s Association of America.

⁴⁰ For additional information, see President’s DNA Initiative, Training and Technical
Assistance on Using DNA to Identify Missing Persons at [http://www.dna.gov/uses/
m_person/outreach/#nsm] .
⁴¹ The model state legislation is at [http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/210740v2.pdf].
⁴² This information was provided to the Congressional Research Service by the U.S.
Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs on June 16, 2008.
⁴³ This section was co-authored with Kirsten J. Colello, Analyst in Gerontology.

Table 1 shows funding for the program from FY2002 through FY2008. No final
action has been taken to fund the program in FY2009.
Table 1: Appropriations for Missing Alzheimer’s Disease Patient
Alert Program, FY2002 through FY2008
($ in millions)
^FY²⁰⁰²^FY²⁰⁰³^FY²⁰⁰⁴^FY²⁰⁰⁵^FY²⁰⁰⁶^FY²⁰⁰⁷^FY²⁰⁰⁸
^0.90^0.86^0.85^0.87^0.84^0.84^0.94
^Sources^:^F^Y^{2000 f}^r^om^H^.^R^e^pt^{. 106-}^680;^F^Y^{2001 f}^r^om^H^.^R^e^pt^{. 107-}^139;^F^Y²⁰⁰²^f^r^om^H^.^R^e^pt^.^107-
^278;^F^Y²⁰⁰³^f^r^om^H^.^R^e^pt^.^108-^10;^F^Y^{2004 f}^r^om^H^.^R^e^pt^{. 108-}^401;^F^Y^{2005 f}^r^om^H^.^R^e^pt^{. 108-}^792;
^F^Y^{2006 f}^r^om^H^.^R^e^pt^{. 109-}^272.^F^Y²⁰⁰⁷^appropri^a^tⁱ^oⁿⁱ^s^bas^e^d^on^F^Y^{2006 en}^act^{ed m}ⁱⁿ^u^s^{a 1.28%}
^res^c^is^sⁱ^on^{, as}^{per P}^.^L^.^110-^{5. FY2008 en}^ac^t^e^d^t^a^ken^f^r^om^{U.S. Hou}^s^{e, C}^o^m^m^{ittee on}^R^u^les^,^J^oⁱⁿ^t
^Ex^pl^an^at^ory^S^t^at^em^en^t^t^o^A^ccom^p^an^y^F^Y^{2008 C}^oⁿ^s^olⁱ^d^a^t^e^d^A^p^p^r^o^p^rⁱ^a^tⁱ^oⁿ^s^A^m^eⁿ^d^m^eⁿ^t^t^o^H^.^R^.²⁷⁶⁴
^(P.L^{. 110-}^{161), D}ⁱ^vⁱ^sⁱ^on^B.
^No^te:^C^oⁿ^g^r^es^s^h^a^s^pas^s^e^{d, an}^{d t}^h^{e Pres}ⁱ^d^en^t^h^a^s^en^act^{ed, a con}^tⁱⁿ^uⁱⁿ^g^res^o^l^u^tⁱ^oⁿ^f^o^{r F}^Y^{2009 (P.L}^.
^110-^{329) t}^h^at^provⁱ^d^es^f^o^r^t^h^e^s^a^m^e^l^e^v^e^l^of^f^uⁿ^dⁱⁿ^g^asⁱⁿ^F^Y^{2008 f}^o^{r m}^o^s^t^prog^ram^s^{. S}^{ee D}ⁱ^vⁱ^sⁱ^on
^A^of^th^{e act.}
Reauthorization Activity in the 110^th Congress. On May 14, 2008, the
House Judiciary Committee marked up the Elder Justice Act (H.R. 1783), introduced
by Representative Rahm Emanuel.⁴⁴ An amendment to the bill — introduced by
Representatives Maxine Waters, Sheila Jackson-Lee, and Adam Schiff — to
re-authorize and expand the Missing Alzheimer’s Patient Alert Program was adopted.
More specifically, the amendment would have, subject to available appropriations,
provided competitive grants to states, local governments, or nonprofit organizations
to pay for programs to protect and locate missing persons with Alzheimer’s disease,
related dementia, or other missing elderly. The amendment would have also
authorized appropriations of $5 million for each of FY2009 through FY2015 to carry
out these grant activities. On June 11, 2008, the bills were approved by the Judiciary
Committee and ordered favorably reported as amended.
On July 30, 2008, the House Judiciary Committee held a markup hearing for the
Missing Alzheimer’s Disease Patient Alert Program Reauthorization of 2008 (H.R.

6503), introduced by Representative Maxine Waters. The bill was favorably reported,

and the House passed it by voice vote under suspension of the rules on September 17,
2008. The bill language is identical to the amendment to H.R. 1783 involving the
program.

⁴⁴ The Elder Abuse Victims Act of 2008 (H.R. 5352), introduced by Representative Joe
Sestak, was amended in a markup hearing held by the House Judiciary Committee to include
the same provisions as those in the amendment proposed by Ms. Waters and others.
Although the House passed H.R. 5352, the bill did not include provisions to reauthorize the
Missing Alzheimer’s Disease Patient Alert Program.

Safe Return Program.⁴⁵ DOJ has awarded funds through the Missing
Alzheimer’s Disease Patient Alert program to the Alzheimer’s Association of
America in each year since FY1996. These funds have been used to establish and
carry out the Safe Return Program, which works to protect and locate missing
individuals with Alzheimer’s and related dementia. Wandering may pose a
significant, if not life threatening, danger to the personal health, safety, and welfare⁴⁶
of those with dementia. This may occur from exposure to the elements, lack of
food, dehydration or lack of medication for extended periods of time, and general
inability to think, act, or communicate in a way that could assist them. Nevertheless,
it is not uncommon for persons with dementia to wander from their homes,
sometimes repeatedly. The Alzheimer’s Association reports that six out of ten
people with Alzheimer’s disease will wander during the course of the disease.
The Safe Return program provides enrollees with a bracelet indicating that the
individual is memory impaired and includes a toll-free, 24-hour emergency response
number to call if the person is found wandering or lost. The call is routed to the
nearest local chapter of the organization, which works to reunite the person with his
or her caregiver, including long-term care facilities. The local chapter obtains
information — through the organization’s central database that includes personal and
medical information and sometimes a picture of the enrollee — about the individual,
and then contacts the caregiver or local law enforcement agency. Family members
or caregivers with a loved one or care recipient enrolled in the program may also
contact the Alzheimer’s Association in the event that he or she goes missing.
The Alzheimer’s Association reports that in two thirds of cases, the enrolled
missing individual and caretaker are immediately reunited. In the one-third of cases
that are truly missing persons incidents, local law enforcement agencies are involved,
and the local chapter provides assistance during search and rescue efforts. The
chapter also provides emotional support to the family and can serve as a media
contact. In addition to these services, the Alzheimer’s Association works with
families to identify needed resources to prevent missing incidents and support the
caregivers of individuals with Alzheimer’s and dementia.
Approximately 120,000 individuals are enrolled in the Safe Return program.⁴⁷
The program reportedly has helped in the safe return of over 8,000 people since 1993.
The organization also provides training materials to law enforcement agencies about
individuals with Alzheimer’s, and how to recognize wandering behavior or
individuals with dementia who are engaging in unsafe or uncharacteristic behavior,
such as driving or shoplifting. Some chapters have partnerships with local law

⁴⁵ Unless otherwise noted, this information was provided to the Congressional Research
Service by the Alzheimer’s Association on November 21, 2007.
⁴⁶ Ashlen Anderson, Public Policy Responses to Wandering Behavior.
⁴⁷ On November 1, 2007, the Alzheimer’s Association, in partnership with MedicAlert,
began to offer a bracelet that also includes information about medical conditions (e.g.,
medication allergies, diabetes, high blood pressure, etc.) of the individual with Alzheimer’s
disease or dementia. Each identification bracelet is $40 ($49 with accompanying medical
information for the Safe Return program and MedicAlert program) and a $20 annual
renewal fee ($25 to include MedicAlert information).

enforcement agencies to educate them about wandering behavior, but the level of
contact varies across the country. Most chapters coordinate with state units on aging
to make them aware of the organization and Safe Return program.
Kristen’s Act
In 2000, Congress passed Kristen’s Act (P.L. 106-468), named after Kristen
Modafferi, who has been missing since 1997. Kristen was 18 when she disappeared
and her family was unable to access services through the National Center for Missing
and Exploited Children because, at the time, the organization only provided
assistance to missing incident cases for children under age 18. NCMEC now provides
services for missing young adults ages 18 to 21, pursuant to Suzanne’s Law, which
requires law enforcement to also immediately submit information about missing
adults to the NCIC ages 18 through 20. Kristen’s Act authorized $1 million in
funding for each of FY2001 to FY2004 and permitted the Attorney General to make
grants to assist law enforcement agencies in locating missing adults; maintain a
database for tracking adults believed by law enforcement to be endangered due to
age, diminished mental capacity, and possible foul play; maintain statistical
information on missing adults; provide resources and referrals to the families of
missing adults; and establish and maintain a national clearinghouse for missing
adults.
Table 2 shows funding appropriated pursuant to Kristen’s Act. Kristen’s Act
grants were made from FY2002 through FY2006 through the Edward Byrne
Discretionary Grant Program to NCMA, though funding authorization expired at the
end of FY2004. As mentioned above, FY2009 funding for many programs is the
same as it was in FY2008. Kristen’s Act grants were not funded in FY2008, and
therefore may not be funded in FY2009. However, final funding decisions for
FY2009 have not been made.
Table 2: Appropriations for Kristen’s Act Grants,
FY2002 through FY2008
($ in millions)
^FY²⁰⁰²^FY²⁰⁰³^FY²⁰⁰⁴^FY²⁰⁰⁵^FY²⁰⁰⁶^FY²⁰⁰⁷^FY²⁰⁰⁸
^1.7⁰^.75⁰^.50⁰^.25⁰^.15^—^a^—^b
^Sources^:^F^Y²⁰⁰²^f^r^om^H^.^R^e^pt^.^107-^278;^F^Y²⁰⁰³^f^r^om^H^.^R^e^pt^{. 108-}^10;^F^Y^{2004 f}^r^om^H^.^R^e^pt^{. 108-}
^401;^F^Y^{2005 f}^r^om^H^.^R^e^pt^{. 108-}^792;^F^Y^2006f^rom^H^.^R^e^pt^{. 109-}^272.
^{a. U}ⁿ^{der t}^h^{e F}^Y^{2007 con}^tⁱⁿ^uⁱⁿ^g^r^e^so^l^u^tⁱ^oⁿ^(P.L^{. 110-}^{5), earm}^a^rk^s^en^act^{ed i}ⁿ^t^h^{e F}^Y²⁰⁰⁶
^{appropriation}^s^bills^h^a^v^eⁿ^o^ef^f^{ect in}^FY2007.
^{b. F}^uⁿ^d^s^w^e^{re n}^o^t^appropri^a^t^e^{d i}ⁿ^F^Y^2008.
Reauthorization Activity in the 110^th Congress. On January 11, 2007,
Representative Sue Myrick introduced Kristen’s Act Reauthorization of 2007 (H.R.
423) to reauthorize the grant for assistance to missing adults. The legislation would
authorize $4 million for each of FY2008 through FY2018. Further, it would insert
congressional findings into law about the work of NCMA. The House Judiciary

Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security held a hearing on H.R.
423 on July 15, 2008.⁴⁸ Ms. Myrick testified about the need for federal support to
assist in the recovery of missing adults. On July 30, 2008, the House Judiciary
Committee approved an amendment to incorporate most of H.R. 423 into the
National Silver Alert Act (H.R. 6064), discussed in further detail below. The House
passed H.R. 6064 on September 17, 2008. Senator Mel Martinez introduced
companion legislation in the Senate on September 25, 2008.
Overview of Services Provided by the National Center for Missing
Adults.⁴⁹ NCMA began in 1995 as the missing adult division of the Nation’s
Missing Children Organization. NCMA received funding under Kristen’s Act to
expand its efforts to recover missing adults beginning in FY2002 and received this
funding through FY2006. Although the organization has continued to operate since
FY2006, it does so on a more limited scale than when it received funding through the
grant program.
NCMA is not an investigating agency and only accepts missing adult cases that
have first been reported to a law enforcement agency. A missing adult case can be
registered with NCMA by a law enforcement official or family member (or
significant other, friend, and certain other individuals) of the missing individual. The
reporting parties complete a registration form that requests any available descriptive
information, circumstances of disappearance, law enforcement case number, NCIC
number, investigating law enforcement agency contact information, and other
information. The reporting party may also submit a photo.
A case manager is assigned to the missing person case and will enter any
relevant information, including answers from the registration form, types of services
provided, and dates and summaries of all conversations with the reporting party,
among other information. The case manager contacts the law enforcement agency
to verify case information and that the missing person has been entered into the NCIC
Missing Person File. (If the law enforcement agency does not enter the record into
the NCIC, the case manager will offer to assist with referrals and resources.) The case
manager then determines which services will be provided by the organization and
contacts the family to let them know about these services. NCMA may also add the
missing person’s profile and picture to its website (www.missingadults.org), send
missing person flyers to the family and law enforcement, assist with press releases,
help generate or manage media attention, and maintain routine contact with the
family.

⁴⁸ U.S. Congress, House Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism,
and Homeland Security, National Clearing Houses on Missing Elderly and Other Adults,^nd
hearing on H.R. 423, H.R. 5898, and H.R. 6064, 2 sess., July 15, 2008 (Washington: GPO,

2008).

⁴⁹ National Center for Missing Adults, Overview, November 29, 2007. (Hereafter referenced
National Center for Missing Adults, Overview.)

Efforts During Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.⁵⁰ In August and September
2005, Hurricanes Katrina and Rita made landfall in four states, displacing hundreds
of thousands of adults and children. To coordinate efforts to recover individuals
believed to be missing as a result of the hurricanes, DOJ requested that NCMA and
NCMEC coordinate services to track and recover individuals missing as a result of
Hurricane Katrina, which made landfall first. In response, NCMEC managed a
missing person hotline and forwarded all cases of missing adults to NCMA. On the
basis of an approximation that NCMA would need to handle between 1,000 and
2,000 missing person reports, the organization submitted a draft budget of $50,000
to DOJ for services that would be provided for up to two months; DOJ provided this
level of funding. Within the first two days of operation, the number of reports
exceeded 2,000. NCMA ultimately took 13,502 reports of missing adults, of which
89 cases remain active. The costs for funding these efforts was approximately
$270,000. NCMA received $50,000 from DOJ and used some funds from its
FY2006 DOJ grant to cover the costs. Because of funding constraints resulting from
the hurricanes, NCMA reports that it has scaled back operations and now employs
one full-time employee, down from 13 in 2006, and relies on assistance from
volunteers.
Support to Secondary Victims.⁵¹ NCMA assists the secondary victims of
missing persons cases — the families and friends of the missing — to cope with the
temporary or long-term loss of their loved ones. Since 2003 through April 2008,
over 75,000 secondary victims have been added to the NCMA missing person
database.⁵² According to NCMA, secondary victims suffer anxiety, depression, and⁵³
Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The loss of a loved one may also result in
lost income and benefits. Unless the missing person is located deceased, family
members may have difficulty obtaining Social Security benefits or managing his or
her estate. NCMA staff provide these family members with support and referrals to
support services and victim assistance programs. NCMA also maintains an online
support group, Hope2Support, to enable family members of missing adults to interact
with others in similar situations. Members may exchange resources, learn about
working with law enforcement agencies and the media, and help them cope with their
loss. As a result of funding constraints, NCMA reports that it has been unable to
publish its Missing Adults Family Handbook, a guidebook to assist families of⁵⁴
missing adults.

⁵⁰ This information was provided to the Congressional Research Service by the National
Center for Missing Adults on May 1, 2008.
⁵¹ Unless otherwise noted, this information was provided to the Congressional Research
Service by the National Center for Missing Adults on May 1, 2008.
⁵² Ibid.
⁵³ National Center for Missing Adults, Overview.
⁵⁴ This information was provided to the Congressional Research Service by the National
Center for Missing Adults on May 1, 2008.

Law Enforcement Training.⁵⁵ In partnership with Fox Valley Technical
College in Appleton, Wisconsin, NCMA’s Law Enforcement Training Advisory⁵⁶
Committee developed a curriculum to provide training to law enforcement on
missing adult cases. Training has been provided by Fox Valley faculty and staff to
chief executive officers as well as to investigators and first responders. Training for
chief executive officers (i.e., police chiefs, sheriffs, and policymakers from law
enforcement and criminal justice agencies) teaches them how to create a community-
wide response to missing adult cases. The training addresses family issues, legal
considerations for developing law enforcement protocols and public policies, the role
of the chief executive officer, and developing resources for a community-based
response, among other topics. The training for investigators and first responders
focuses on the perspective of the secondary victims, effective use of the media, legal
considerations for developing a case, framing an investigation through use of case
studies and practical exercises, and effective staffing for case management, among
other topics. Due to funding constraints, training courses have not been provided
since 2006. From 2004 through 2006, 62 CEOs and 258 investigators and first
responders received training.
Model Policy.⁵⁷ NCMA’s Law Enforcement Training Advisory Committee,
in consultation with Fox Valley Technical College, developed a model policy on
taking missing adult reports for law enforcement to implement within their agency.
The policy states that the agency is to accept every missing person report and where
a threat or risk exists, the agency is to conduct a thorough investigation. The model
policy also includes definitions of missing adults and sub-categories of missing⁵⁸
adults, including those with Alzheimer’s disease and dementia; procedures for
taking missing person reports and the response by an officer or investigator; and
protocols for completing missing person reports, including entering information into
the NCIC and the recovery or return of missing adults.
Data Tracking. As detailed above, NCMA maintains descriptive information
on missing adults and secondary victims. The system also records case management
activities, calls for service, correspondence, and tracking and mailing activities. The
system is designed to track specific disabilities (Alzheimer’s disease, psychological
disabilities, and high risk lifestyles, among others) and causes of death (homicide,
vehicular accident, car jacking, accidental death, among others) to help identify high-
risk categories of missing adults. In addition, the data management system collects

⁵⁵ This information was provided to the Congressional Research Service by Fox Valley
Technical College and the National Center for Missing Adults on May 7, 2008.
⁵⁶ The committee is composed of law enforcement and other government officials, victim
advocates, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, and staff from Fox
Valley Technical College.
⁵⁷ This information was provided to the Congressional Research Service by the National
Center for Missing Adults on November 28, 2007.
⁵⁸ The policy manual defines missing adult as “any person 18 years of age or older whose
whereabouts are unknown and who is missing under circumstances not conforming to their
ordinary routine and habits or who may be in need of assistance or intervention. The manual
defines missing/at-risk; missing/unusual circumstances; and missing/not at-risk adult.

information to determine if a case was closed due to the individual being located
alive or deceased. NCMA anticipates this information being used to help create
profiles of missing persons and to assist in their recovery. The system also collects
information on secondary victims, such as the number of dependents, to determine
how families and loved ones are affected by the loss of the missing person.
National Center for Missing and Exploited Children
The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children is a primary
component of the federally funded Missing and Exploited Children’s Program.⁵⁹
Although NCMEC’s mission is to recover missing children under age 18, it also
provides services for missing young adults ages 18 through 20, pursuant to Suzanne’s
Law, which requires law enforcement to also immediately submit information about
missing adults to the NCIC ages 18 through 20. This law changed the upper age limit
of individuals who must be entered into the NCIC.
NCMEC processes young adult cases differently than cases for missing
children.⁶⁰ NCMEC will accept a young adult case only if it is reported by a law
enforcement entity — and not by parents, spouses, partners, or others — because the
organization relies on law enforcement personnel to verify that the young adult is
missing due to foul play or other reasons that would cause concern about the
individual’s whereabouts, such as diminished mental capacity. NCMEC then assists
in recovery efforts for these adults as it would for children under age 18. A case
manager in the Missing Children’s Division is assigned to serve as the single point
of contact for the searching family and to provide technical assistance to locate
abductors and recover missing children and young adults.
Issues
The various federal data systems to record information about missing adults
raise the question about the need and ability for the systems to share this information.
Further, federal and state policymakers and other stakeholders have increasingly
focused on two issues related to adults who go missing: (1) assisting states with
building the capacity to develop both alert systems to inform the public about missing
older adults and technology to recover these individuals and (2) extending federal
protections to missing adults with diminished mental capacity. Where applicable,
this section discusses legislation that was pending in the 110^th Congress to address
these issues.

⁵⁹ NCMEC receives federal funding through the Missing and Exploited Children’s Program
and other sources. For a full discussion of NCMEC activities, see CRS Report RL34050
Missing and Exploited Children: Background, Policies, and Issues, by Adrienne L.
Fernandes.
⁶⁰ This information was provided to the Congressional Research Service by the National
Center for Missing and Exploited Children on April 17, 2007.

Coordination of Federally Funded Databases on Missing
Persons and Unidentified Decedents
The first section of this report discussed the various federally funded databases
that store information on missing persons and unidentified decedents. These
databases do not currently populate one another, although some of the databases
indicate whether information about a particular individual is available in another
database. This limitation raises the question about whether the federal government
can and should develop technology to enable the databases to coordinate, although
concerns about privacy and funding would likely need to be addressed. DOJ appears
to have begun initial discussions about the interactions of the databases through its
Missing Person Task Force. Further, the NamUs database is expected to be fully
operational in 2009 and could ultimately serve as a central repository on missing
adults and unidentified remains.
Alert Systems
Silver or Senior Alerts.⁶¹ Alert systems, known as Silver or Senior Alerts,
reportedly have been established in at least eleven states — Colorado, Georgia,
Illinois, Kentucky, Michigan, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Ohio, Texas,
and Virginia — to alert law enforcement or the public through various media outlets
about vulnerable adults who are reported missing.⁶² These alert systems were created
out of concern for the safety of seniors and other at-risk adult populations who are
prone to wandering due to a physical or cognitive disability or medical condition
such as Alzheimer’s or other forms of dementia. Some missing adult alert programs,
including those for Oklahoma and Virginia, are modeled after the states’ AMBER
Alert system.⁶³
Issuing alerts to law enforcement agencies and the public for missing vulnerable
adults in some of the states appears to be at the discretion of the law enforcement

⁶¹ This section was co-authored with Kirsten J. Colello, Analyst in Gerontology.
⁶² These states were mentioned as having missing adult alert systems in news articles and
policy publications, including Ben Schmitt, “Silver Alerts Could Help Pinpoint Missing
Seniors’ Location,” USA Today, July 8, 2008; Kelly Wilkicki, Silver Alerts Sound the Alarm
When Certain Seniors Go Missing, National Conference of State Legislatures, May 27,

2008; Carol A. Jones and Kathy G. Miller, Long-Term Care: Facility Quality and Safety,

Health Policy Tracking Service, End-of-Year Issue Brief, January 2008; and National Center
for Assisted Living, NCAL Focus, American Health Care Association, Washington, DC,
August 2006. The Congressional Research Services held informal discussions with officials
in six of the 11 states (Colorado, Georgia, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Texas, and Virginia)
in March 2008. We did not conduct our own search of state statutes or survey states that
may have adopted alert systems for missing adults through administrative rules or other
mechanisms.
⁶³ AMBER systems are voluntary partnerships among law enforcement agencies,
broadcasters, and transportation agencies to activate messages in a targeted area when a
child is abducted and believed to be in grave danger. For additional information, see CRS
Report RL34050, Missing and Exploited Children: Background, Policies, and Issues, by
Adrienne L. Fernandes.

agency — local or state or both — and is not required of the agency.⁶⁴ In addition,
state alert systems vary in terms of the target population for issuing an alert (i.e.,
older adults with dementia versus any adult with a disability). Most law enforcement
agencies have the ability to disseminate the alert to law enforcement agencies and
media in the local area, region, statewide, and other states. For example, the Texas
Division of Emergency Management disseminates information within the alert
advisory area to local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies, primary media
outlets, the Texas Department of Transportation, the Texas Lottery Commission, and
the Independent Bankers Association of Texas. However, Illinois issues alerts only
to law enforcement agencies and does not involve the public or media. Some states
also have the ability to issue regional or interstate alerts.
Some advocates have raised concerns that alert systems may not be useful for
some adults who go missing. For example, it is reported that nearly all (94%) persons
with Alzheimer’s disease who wander are found less than 1.5 miles from home and
almost 30% are found among makeshift shelters under brush or briar.⁶⁵ Further, there
is concern that alerting the media repeatedly about a missing adult case could
desensitize the public to the issue of wandering. Some advocates suggest that
policymakers may wish to consider Silver Alerts in combination with a combination
of other policy approaches.⁶⁶
Legislation in the 110^th Congress. On April 24, 2008, Representative
Gus Bilirakis introduced the Silver Alert Grant Program Act of 2008 (H.R. 5898).
H.R. 5898 sought to authorize the Attorney General to award grants to states to
implement a state-administered notification system (a Silver Alert system), to help
locate missing individuals with Alzheimer’s disease and other dementia-related
illnesses or make improvements to a state’s existing Silver Alert system. The bill
would have also required the Attorney General to prepare an annual report to
Congress on state Silver Alert Systems.
On May 16, 2008, Representative Lloyd Doggett introduced the National Silver
Alert Act (H.R. 6064), which would have authorized the Attorney General, subject
to the availability of appropriations, to establish and administer a national Silver
Alert communications system that provides assistance to regional and local search
efforts for missing seniors. The Attorney General would have been directed to assign
an officer to serve as the national coordinator of the network and coordinate with
states to encourage the development of Silver Alert plans; establish voluntary
guidelines for states to use in developing plans; develop proposed public safety and

⁶⁴ This information is primarily based on the Congressional Research Service’s review of
authorizing legislation. In addition, the Congressional Research Service held informal
discussions with six states (Colorado, Georgia, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Texas, and
Virginia) in March 2008.
⁶⁵ Ashlen Anderson, Public Policy Responses to Wandering Behavior.
⁶⁶ For example, one such approach might be providing support to the caregivers of
individuals with dementia, to better ensure that adults with the disease do not go missing.
For information about current federal funding to assist caregivers, see CRS Report
RL34123, Family Caregiving to the Older Population: Background, Federal Programs, and
Issues for Congress, by Kirsten J. Colello.

other protocols to recover missing seniors; and establish an advisory group to assist
states and other entities with developing Silver Alert plans, among other duties. The
coordinator would have also been required to develop minimum standards for issuing
alerts and the extent that alerts should be issued through the network. H.R. 6064
specified that the standards would have been adoptable on a voluntary basis and
would not have included specific age requirements. Like H.R. 5898, the bill would
have established a grant program to support the development and enhancement of
programs and activities for Silver Alerts. H.R. 6064 would have also required the
Attorney General to prepare an annual report to Congress on state Silver Alert
systems.
The Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security held
a hearing on July 15, 2008, concerning H.R. 5898, H.R. 6064, and the Kristen’s Act
Reauthorization Act of 2007 (H.R. 423).⁶⁷ The bills’ sponsors asserted the need for
federal support of state efforts to develop Silver Alert systems and the need to
authorize funding for programs to locate missing adults generally with grants
authorized under Kristen’s Act. On July 30, 2008, the Judiciary Committee marked
up and favorably reported H.R. 6064 with two amendments. One of the amendments,
introduced by Representative Bobby Scott, modified H.R. 6064 and incorporated
parts of H.R. 5898 and H.R. 423.⁶⁸ The other amendment, introduced by
Representative Sheila Jackson-Lee, sought to authorize DOJ, after consulting with
the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), to award grants to states and
local governments to carry out programs that provide electronic monitoring services
to elderly individuals that would assist in their recovery if they go missing; this
amendment would have authorized $2 million for each of FY2009 through FY2014
for these services. On September 17, 2008, the House passed H.R. 6064 by voice
vote under suspension of the rules. On September 25, 2008, Senator Mel Martinez
introduced companion legislation (S. 3579).
Alert Notices by Phone. Congress has supported technology that alerts the
public by phone about missing individuals by funding A Child Is Missing Alert and
Recovery Center, a nonprofit organization in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, that provides

⁶⁷ U.S. Congress, House Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism,
and Homeland Security, National Clearing Houses on Missing Elderly and Other Adults,^nd
hearing on H.R. 423, H.R. 5898, and H.R. 6064, 2 sess., July 15, 2008 (Washington: GPO,

2008). The subcommittee scheduled a hearing on July 15, 2008, to markup H.R. 6064;

however, the bill was not marked up because a quorum was not present.
⁶⁸ The amendment made changes to H.R. 6064, including adding information to the
guidelines that would be issued to states; requiring the Coordinator of the Silver Alert
Program to consult with state and local officials in establishing minimum standards for
issuing alerts; specifying the authorization of appropriations for the grant program separate
from the communication network activities; and making technical changes. The amendment
incorporated from H.R. 5898 the information that would be included in the report to
Congress about the program. The amendment incorporated most of H.R. 423, except that
it omitted one of the findings in the bill about the work of NCMA. Further, the amendment
added that the Attorney General would periodically solicit applications for grants to
maintain a national resource center for missing adults, among other activities, by publishing
a request for applications in the Federal Register and by posting the request on the DOJ
website.

this service. The organization works with law enforcement when a child, disabled
individual, or vulnerable older individual is missing. After being contacted by local
law enforcement about a missing incident, the organization sends a recorded message
by phone and text about the missing child or adult to residences and businesses in an
area where the individual is suspected of going missing. The message asks the
community to call the police with any information they may have about the missing
person. Between FY2002 through FY2008, Congress appropriated funding to A
Child Is Missing through the earmarking process in three years: $496,665 in FY2003;
$98,949 in FY2004; and $2.4 million in FY2005.⁶⁹
Legislation in the 110^th Congress. Legislation in the 110^thCongress —
A Child Is Missing Alert and Recovery Center Act (H.R. 5464/S. 2667), introduced
by Representative Ron Klein and Senator Robert Menendez — would have directed
the Attorney General to make an annual grant to A Child Is Missing Alert and
Recovery Center to expand its operations, maintain and expand technologies to
recover missing individuals, and establish and maintain regional centers to provide
training and distribute information to law enforcement about utilizing the services of
the center, among other purposes. The law defined “missing child” as an individual
whose whereabouts are unknown to a federal, state, or local law enforcement agency.
The bills did not restrict the definition of “missing child” to a specific age range, or
limit the use of funds to recovering only missing children. The proposed
authorization level for the grant was $5 million for each of FY2009 through FY2014.
H.R. 5464 was referred to the House Judiciary Committee, which held a markup
hearing on May 14, 2008, on the bill and favorably reported it to the House, where
it was passed by voice vote under suspension of the rules on July 14, 2008. The
Senate Judiciary Committee did not take up S. 2667.
Tracking Technology.⁷⁰ Electronic monitoring services for individuals who
are susceptible to going missing are being implemented by some state and local law
enforcement agencies with technology developed by Project Lifesaver International,
a nonprofit organization that administers the Project Lifesaver program. Project
Lifesaver uses a personalized wristband that emits a signal to track individuals prone
to going missing. The wristband is worn by the clients continuously, and each
month, a law enforcement officer or trained volunteer visits with the clients to
replace the wristband batteries and provide referrals to clients and their caregivers in
need of social services. When family members or caregivers report to the designated
Project Lifesaver agency — typically a local law enforcement or first responder
agency — that the client is missing, a search and rescue team responds to the
wanderer’s area to search using a mobile locator tracking system.⁷¹

⁶⁹ This information was provided to the Congressional Research Service by the U.S.
Department of Justice, Office of Congressional Affairs on July 16, 2008. Congress has also
provided funding through the earmarking process for A Child Is Missing affiliates in states
and localities.
⁷⁰ This information was provided to the Congressional Research Service by Project
Lifesaver on March 18, 2008.
⁷¹ According to Project Lifesaver International, the cost for implementation is $7,680,
(continued...)

Project Lifesaver grew out of local law enforcement experience with search and
rescue efforts for missing persons with Alzheimer’s and other forms of dementia.
The target population of the program has expanded to include children with special
needs such as autism and Down’s syndrome and to anyone else that may be at risk
of wandering for a medical reason. In addition to providing the technology, the
program trains the designated agency to communicate with persons with Alzheimer’s
disease and other disorders.
Project Lifesaver International reported that, as of March 2008, the tracking
technology was used by 711 law enforcement agencies in 42 states and in some parts
of Canada. According to Project Lifesaver International, the benefits from the
program include saving law enforcement and search and rescue response time and
resources in locating missing persons due to wandering. The organization reports that
search times have been reduced from hours and days for searches without radio
technology to minutes in searches that use the technology. In over 1,500 searches,
there have been no reported serious injuries or deaths and recovery times have
averaged less than 30 minutes.⁷²
Legislation in the 110^th Congress. As referenced above, H.R. 6064, as
approved by the House Judiciary Committee, would have authorized DOJ, after
consulting with HHS, to award grants to states and local governments to carry out
programs that provide electronic monitoring services to elderly individuals that will
assist in their recovery if they go missing; this amendment would have authorized $2
million for each of FY2009 through FY2014 for these services.
Further, amendments to H.R. 1783 and H.R. 5352, which were approved by the
House Judiciary Committee, would have, subject to available appropriations,
provided competitive grants for the Missing Alzheimer’s Disease Patient Alert
program. Grants would have been available to states, local governments, or nonprofit
organizations to pay for programs to protect and locate missing persons with
Alzheimer’s disease, related dementia, or other missing elderly.
Special Federal Protections for Vulnerable Missing Adults
There is currently no federal mandate to locate missing adults who function
cognitively as children. One bill in the 110^th Congress sought to extend the same
federal assistance to these adults that is provided for missing children. On May 9,
2007, Representative Ginny Brown-Waite introduced the Audrey Nerenberg Act
(H.R. 271). The legislation proposed to change the definition of “missing child”
under the Missing Children’s Assistance Act, as amended, to include individuals
determined to have a mental capacity of less than 18 years of age as determined by
an appropriate medical authority. The act did not specify which adults with a

⁷¹ (...continued)
which includes the equipment and training of search and rescue teams in how to use the
technology. A monthly cost of about $9 per transmitter covers the costs for replacement
of the battery and band. Some agencies may pass this monthly charge on to clients enrolled
in the program.
⁷² For further information, see [http://www.projectlifesaver.org/site/].

diminished mental capacity would be protected. For example, the legislation could
have included disorders as diverse as Down’s syndrome and Alzheimer’s, and if left
for states to decide, the definition could have varied widely from one state to another.
The bill also did not define the rights of adults with cognitive disabilities who want
to go missing and may choose to do so for legitmate reasons.
H.R. 271 would have essentially required the National Center for Missing and
Exploited Children — which receives most of the funding from the federal Missing
and Exploited Children’s program, authorized by the Missing Children’s Assistance
Act — to work to recover any missing adults deemed eligible under H.R. 271. In
response to the possibility that NCMEC would need to focus its work on certain
vulnerable adults ages 21 and older, the organization has said that it would prefer to
initially take on missing adults cases on a pilot basis to assess the issues and
problems that may arise, such as varying state law definitions of diminished
capacity.⁷³ According to NCMEC, “We would only take diminished capacity cases
if requested to do so by a law enforcement agency. And given that these are cases of
missing adults, who are not like children whose disappearance is presumed to be
involuntary, we would likely need limited civil and criminal liability to prevent costly
and burdensome lawsuits.”

⁷³ This information was provided to the Congressional Research Service by the National
Center for Missing and Exploited Children on October 25, 2007.

Appendix
Table A-1: National Crime Information Center (NCIC):
Missing Entries of Adults Ages 18 and Older, 2007
Category Number of Missing
(as defined under the NCIC Operating Manual)Adults and Share of
Total Missing Adult
Cases
Disability: a person of any age who is missing and under30,964
proven mental/physical disability or senile, thereby(18.1%)
subjecting him/herself or others to personal and immediate^a
danger.
Endangered: a person of any age who is missing under79,885
circumstances indicating that his/her physical safety may be(46.7%)
in danger.
Involuntary: a person of any age who is missing under15,582
circumstances indicating that the disappearance may not(9.1%)
have been voluntary, i.e., abduction or kidnapping.
Juvenile: a person under the age of 21 who is missing and8,697
does not meet any of the enter criteria set forth under the(5.1%)
Disability, Endangered, Involuntary, or Catastrophe
categories.
Catastrophe: are missing after a catastrophe.^a245
(0.1%)
Other: are 21 and older and do not meet any of the above35,840
criteria but for whom there is a reasonable concern for their(20.9%)
safety.
Total171,213
Source: Congressional Research Service presentation of data provided by the U.S. Department
of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Criminal Justice Information Services Division on
April 23, 2008, and May 1, 2008.
a. According to the FBI, “proven physical or mental disability” refers to an individual who could
have suicidal tendencies or a drug addiction, is a hemophiliac or diabetic, or has previously
escaped custody, among other possible characteristics. A “catastrophe” refers to a disaster,
such as an airplane crash, terrorist attack, natural disaster, among other possible scenarios.
This information was provided to the Congressional Research Service by the U.S.
Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Criminal Justice Information
Services Division on December 26, 2007.

Table A-2: Databases of Missing Adults
and Unidentified Remains
^Da^t^a^ba^{se — Adm}ⁱ^nist^ering^Features^Acces^s^{to Databas}^e
^A^g^en^{cy or Organ}ⁱ^z^ati^oⁿ
^Natioⁿ^a^{l Cr}^im^{e I}ⁿ^f^o^r^m^atioⁿ^T^h^{e databas}^eⁱⁿ^clu^d^es^D^a^t^a^{are report}^e^{d by}^{, an}^d
^Ce^nte^r⁽^N^CI^C)^Mⁱ^ssing^d^e^scrⁱ^p^tiv^{e in}^f^o^r^m^atioⁿ^ab^o^u^t^av^{ailable to, au}^th^orized
^P^e^r^s^oⁿ^{File an}^d^Un^id^en^tif^ied^t^h^{e m}ⁱ^s^sⁱⁿ^gⁱⁿ^di^vⁱ^du^al^{or t}^h^ei^r^f^e^{deral, s}^t^{ate, an}^{d local}
^P^e^r^s^oⁿ^{s File — DOJ}^/FB^I^rem^aⁱⁿ^s^.^In^di^vⁱ^du^al^s^are^crimⁱⁿ^{al j}^u^s^{tice an}^{d n}^oⁿ^-
^clas^sⁱ^fⁱ^{ed u}ⁿ^d^{er on}^{e of}^sⁱ^x^crimⁱⁿ^{al j}^u^s^{tice ag}^en^cies^.
^mⁱ^s^sⁱⁿ^g^pers^on^cat^eg^ori^e^s^or
^oⁿ^{e o}^f^th^r^{ee u}ⁿⁱ^d^eⁿ^tif^ied
^mⁱ^s^sⁱⁿ^g^pers^on^cat^eg^ori^e^s^.
^T^h^{e dat}^a^bas^e^sⁱⁿ^di^cat^e
^w^h^eth^e^{r DNA}^an^d
^fi^nge^r^p^rⁱ^ntⁱ^{ng i}ⁿ^fo^r^m^a^tⁱ^o^{n a}^r^e
^av^ailable.
^Natioⁿ^a^{l DNA}^Iⁿ^d^e^x^Sy^stem^T^h^{e s}^y^s^t^emⁱⁿ^clu^d^es^th^ree^{Data are reported by}^s^t^{ate an}^d
^{(NDIS) — DOJ}^/FB^I^dat^a^bas^e^s^f^o^{r t}^h^{e D}^N^A^of^lo^{cal DNA}^lab^o^r^ato^r^{ies, in}
^mⁱ^ssi^{ng p}^e^r^s^oⁿ^s,^uni^d^e^ntⁱ^fⁱ^e^d^cooperatⁱ^oⁿ^wⁱ^t^h^s^t^at^{e an}^d
^r^e^m^aⁱⁿ^{s, an}^d^r^e^lativ^{es o}^f^{local law}^en^f^o^rcem^en^t
^mⁱ^{ssing p}^e^r^s^oⁿ^s.^of^fⁱ^cials^.^A^{ll prof}^iles^can^be
^acces^s^e^{d by}^th^{e FB}^{I; s}^o^m^e
^prof^iles^can^{be acces}^s^e^{d by}
^th^{e s}^t^{ate an}^{d local DNA}
^l^a^borat^ori^e^s^.
^Natioⁿ^a^{l Missin}^g^an^d^T^h^{e s}^y^s^t^em^is^uⁿ^d^er^D^a^t^a^{are report}^e^{d by}^{, an}^d
^Un^id^en^tif^ied^P^e^r^s^oⁿ^{s Sy}^stem^coⁿ^s^tr^u^c^tioⁿ^an^d^w^{ill in}^clu^d^e^av^{ailable to, au}^th^orized
^(Nam^{Us) — DOJ}^/NIJ^t^w^{o dat}^a^bas^e^s^f^o^{r des}^c^ri^ptⁱ^v^e^f^e^{deral, s}^t^{ate, an}^{d local}
ⁱⁿ^f^o^rm^ation^an^{d pictu}^r^es^crimⁱⁿ^{al j}^u^s^{tice an}^{d n}^oⁿ^-
^abou^t^mⁱ^s^sⁱⁿ^g^pers^on^s^an^d^crimⁱⁿ^{al j}^u^s^{tice ag}^en^cies^.
^uⁿⁱ^d^eⁿ^tif^ied^r^e^m^aⁱⁿ^{s. T}^h^e^P^r^of^iles^can^{be acces}^s^e^{d by}
^uⁿⁱ^d^eⁿ^tif^ied^r^e^m^aⁱⁿ^{s d}^a^tab^a^se^th^{ese en}^{tities an}^d^th^{e p}^u^b^lic,
^{is o}^p^e^r^a^tioⁿ^a^{l, an}^d^f^eatu^r^es^a^l^t^h^o^{ugh t}^h^e^p^u^b^lⁱ^c^m^a^y^no^t
ⁱⁿ^f^o^r^m^atioⁿ^ab^o^u^{t th}^e^h^a^v^e^acces^s^{to in}^f^o^rm^ation
^lo^catioⁿ^o^f^th^{e r}^e^m^aⁱⁿ^s,^an^{d ph}^ot^og^raph^s^f^o^{r s}^o^m^e
^dⁱ^stⁱ^ngui^shi^{ng fe}^a^t^ur^e^s^,^aⁿ^d^profⁱ^l^e^s^.
^law^en^f^o^rcem^en^{t con}^t^act
ⁱⁿ^f^o^r^m^atioⁿ^,^an^d^w^h^eth^e^r
^DNA^an^{d den}^t^{al records}^are
^av^ai^l^a^bl^{e. T}^h^{e t}^w^{o dat}^a^bas^e^s
^w^{ill u}^ltim^ately^b^e^lin^k^e^d^.
^N^a^tⁱ^o^na^l^Ce^nt^e^r^fo^r^Mⁱ^ssi^ng^T^h^{e s}^y^s^t^emⁱⁿ^clu^d^es^{Data are en}^{tered by}^NC^MA
^A^d^u^{lts (}^N^CMA⁾^Datab^a^{se —}^d^e^scrⁱ^p^tiv^{e in}^f^o^r^m^atioⁿ^ab^o^u^t^s^t^af^f^af^{ter con}^f^irmⁱⁿ^g^th^{at a}
^NC^MA^mⁱ^ssin^g^ad^u^{lts, in}^clu^dⁱⁿ^g^mⁱ^ssin^g^ad^u^{lt r}^e^p^o^r^{t w}^a^{s f}ⁱ^r^s^t
ⁱⁿ^f^o^r^m^atioⁿ^ab^o^u^{t th}^e^su^b^m^itted^to^{a law}
^circu^m^s^t^an^ces^of^th^e^en^f^o^r^cem^en^{t en}^tity^{. P}^r^o^f^iles
ⁱⁿ^divⁱ^du^al’^s^dis^a^ppearan^ce,^can^{be acces}^s^by^th^{e pu}^blic.

^dⁱ^stⁱ^ngui^shi^{ng fe}^a^t^ur^e^s^,
^w^h^eth^e^{r DNA}^an^{d den}^t^al
^records^{are av}^{ailable, an}^{d law}
^en^f^o^rcem^en^{t con}^t^act
ⁱⁿ^fo^r^m^a^tⁱ^o^n,^a^m^o^{ng o}^t^he^r
ⁱⁿ^f^o^r^m^atioⁿ^.

^Da^t^a^ba^{se — Adm}ⁱ^nist^ering^Features^Acces^s^{to Databas}^e
^A^g^en^{cy or Organ}ⁱ^z^ati^oⁿ
^Iⁿ^teg^r^ated^A^u^to^m^a^ted^T^h^{e s}^y^s^t^emⁱⁿ^clu^d^es^D^a^t^a^{are report}^e^{d by}
^Fin^g^e^r^p^rⁱⁿ^t^I^d^en^tif^icatioⁿ^fi^nge^r^p^rⁱ^nt^{s a}ⁿ^d^au^th^o^r^izedⁱⁿ^terⁿ^atioⁿ^a^l,
^Sy^stem⁽^I^A^FI^S)^—^corres^pon^din^g^crimⁱⁿ^al^f^e^{deral, s}^t^{ate, an}^{d local}
^DOJ^/FB^I^histo^r^ie^s.^crimⁱⁿ^{al j}^u^s^{tice an}^{d n}^oⁿ^-
^crimⁱⁿ^{al j}^u^s^{tice ag}^en^cies^.
^Vio^l^en^{t Cr}^imⁱⁿ^al^T^h^{e s}^y^s^t^emⁱⁿ^clu^d^es^D^a^t^a^{are report}^e^{d by}
^A^ppreh^en^sⁱ^on^Prog^ramⁱⁿ^f^o^r^m^atioⁿ^oⁿ^cr^im^es,^au^th^{orized f}^e^{deral, s}^t^{ate, an}^d
^(Vi^C^A^P^{) — DOJ/}^F^BIⁱⁿ^c^l^udⁱ^{ng m}ⁱ^ssi^{ng p}^e^r^s^oⁿ^{local crim}ⁱⁿ^{al j}^u^s^{tice an}^d
^cas^es^w^h^{ere th}^eⁿ^oⁿ^-^crimⁱⁿ^{al j}^u^s^{tice ag}^en^cies^.
^circu^m^s^t^an^cesⁱⁿ^{dicate a}
^str^oⁿ^g^p^o^ssib^ility^o^f^f^o^u^l^p^l^ay
^an^d^th^{e v}ⁱ^ctim^{is still m}ⁱ^ssin^g^.
^T^h^{e d}^a^tab^a^{se en}^tr^{ies ar}^e
^con^tin^u^o^u^s^ly^com^p^{ared on}
^th^{e bas}ⁱ^s^of^certain^as^pects^of
^th^{e crim}^e.
^Source:^C^oⁿ^g^r^es^sⁱ^on^{al R}^e^s^earch^Serv^ice.