PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.By Senator Grassley from Committee on the Judiciary filed written report. Report No. 114-397.
Congressional Research Service
Version 35 · Passed Senate amended · Jul 14, 2016
Kevin and Avonte's Law of 2016
TITLE I--MISSING ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE PATIENT ALERT PROGRAM REAUTHORIZATION
Missing Americans Alert Program Act of 2016
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
(Sec. 102) This bill amends the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 to revise and rename the Missing Alzheimer's Disease Patient Alert Program as the Missing Americans Alert Program and to reauthorize it through FY2021.
It directs the Department of Justice's (DOJ's) Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) to award grants to state and local law enforcement or public safety agencies to develop tracking technology programs to locate missing individuals with dementia or children with developmental disabilities. The BJA must give preference to grant applicants that partner with nonprofit organizations directly linked to individuals, and families of individuals, with dementia or developmental disabilities.
Additionally, it directs the BJA to award competitive grants to state and local law enforcement or public safety agencies and nonprofit organizations to develop or operate locally based proactive programs to prevent wandering and locate missing individuals with dementia or children with developmental disabilities.
The bill subjects grants under the Missing Americans Program to accountability provisions. DOJ's Office of Inspector General must conduct annual audits of selected grant recipients. The bill prohibits grants to nonprofit organizations that hold money in an offshore account to avoid tax liability. It also limits the use of grants under this bill for conferences that use more than $20,000 in DOJ funds.
DOJ must identify and report on duplicative grant awards. DOJ must also report annually to Congress certain information regarding the Missing Americans Alert Program.
TITLE II--EDUCATION AND OUTREACH
(Sec. 201) The bill amends the Missing Children's Assistance Act to specify that, with respect to training and technical assistance provided by the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, cases involving missing and exploited children include cases involving children with developmental disabilities such as autism.
TITLE III--PRIVACY PROTECTIONS
(Sec. 302) DOJ must establish and certain grant recipients must comply with standards and best practices related to the use of tracking technology to locate missing individuals with dementia or developmental disabilities.
People & committees
Sen. Schumer, Charles E. [D-NY] · D–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
By Senator Grassley from Committee on the Judiciary filed written report. Report No. 114-397.
By Senator Grassley from Committee on the Judiciary filed written report. Report No. 114-397.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Education and the Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Education and the Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Education and the Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Voice Vote.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Voice Vote.
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S5185)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 423.
Committee on the Judiciary. Reported by Senator Grassley without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on the Judiciary. Reported by Senator Grassley without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on the Judiciary. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.2614 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.2614 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.2614 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.2614 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.