New VIVAS Act Mandates Comprehensive Study on Gender Violence in Puerto Rico, Due in 540 Days

This bill, officially called the Violence Impact and Vulnerabilities Assessment Study Act (VIVAS Act), directs the Comptroller General of the United States—the head of the Government Accountability Office (GAO)—to conduct a deep, comprehensive study on gender-based violence in Puerto Rico. The core purpose is to move past fragmented information and establish a unified, data-driven assessment of what Congress calls a "serious public health and human rights crisis." This is not a typical audit; it’s a mandated research project focused on uncovering the systemic roots and real-world impact of violence on women, the LGBTQIA community, and other vulnerable groups.

The GAO must deliver an interim report within 270 days and a final, publicly available report in both English and Spanish within 540 days of the bill’s enactment. Crucially, the study isn't just about counting incidents; it has to look at how factors like poverty, cultural norms, inadequate infrastructure, and the massive disruptions caused by natural disasters (like hurricanes and the pandemic) intersect with and worsen gender violence. For someone juggling work and family, this means the eventual report should provide clear answers on why existing systems fail, especially in times of crisis.

The System Checkup: Who’s Responding, and How?

The bill requires the GAO to perform a meticulous checkup on the institutions responsible for responding to this crisis. This includes evaluating the capacity and effectiveness of law enforcement, the courts, health systems, and shelters. They need to figure out why services are inaccessible in rural areas, why cases are under-reported, and what shortcomings exist in police and prosecutorial work. Think of it as a top-to-bottom performance review of the safety net.

One of the most important elements is the focus on data and transparency. The GAO must identify gaps in reporting and recommend improvements, specifically exploring options for creating a unified public data system on gender-based violence. If you’ve ever tried to find reliable public information on femicides or court outcomes, you know how frustrating fragmented data is. This provision aims to create a transparent, measurable oversight system with public dashboards and independent evaluations, making it easier for citizens to hold the government accountable.

Putting Local Experts in the Driver’s Seat

This study is explicitly designed to be "culturally informed and community-engaged." This means the GAO can't just parachute in and run the numbers. They are mandated to actively engage with local Puerto Rican organizations, including women's shelters, LGBTQ advocacy groups, and survivor-led initiatives. This engagement must include community roundtables and involving these groups in the research design and data interpretation. The study will also specifically examine how these local organizations address systemic gaps and what challenges they face with sustainability and funding, leading to recommendations for increased support.

This is a big deal because it recognizes that the people doing the work on the ground—the ones running shelters and providing direct services—often have the most accurate picture of what’s needed. The bill is essentially requiring the federal government to listen to the experts who live the reality every day.

Analyzing the Femicide Strategy

The GAO must conduct a specialized analysis of the government’s current strategies to prevent femicide and gender-based violence. This includes evaluating public education campaigns, strategic plans, and budgets. The bill asks a pointed question: Are education-focused initiatives actually addressing the root causes, or just the symptoms? Are they providing urgent protection, or just long-term change? This analysis must review input directly from civil society and survivors to check for inconsistencies between official reports and independent data. For the everyday person, this means the resulting report should tell us if the money being spent on prevention is actually making people safer, or if it’s just paying for ineffective public relations campaigns. The final report will include evidence-based recommendations, broken down by municipality, on how to better balance prevention education with structural reforms and direct protections.