The PROSPER Act of 2025 would authorize the Attorney General to award grants to eligible entities to implement a youth gun violence prevention program. Grants must support strategies that are evidence-informed, trauma-informed, culturally competent, developmentally inclusive, and designed to reach youth at the highest risk of involvement in gun violence.
Eligible activities include healing from past trauma, fostering youth empowerment through leadership and conflict management, connecting young people with mental health professionals and mentors, promoting safe community environments, providing gun safety education and hotlines, and supporting reintegration for youth exposed to violence or the juvenile justice system. The bill also specifies appropriations for fiscal years 2026–2030 to fund these efforts: $100,000,000 for grants under title V of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act, with $25,000,000 of that amount dedicated to the youth gun violence prevention program.
Definitions establish who can be an eligible entity (including institutions of higher education, tribal government agencies, NGOs serving tribes, community-based organizations, and certain local governments) and clarify terms like “community-based organization,” “Indian Tribe,” and “law enforcement agency.”
At a Glance
What It Does
The Attorney General is authorized to award grants to eligible entities to carry out a youth gun violence prevention program. Grants must fund evidence-informed, trauma-informed, culturally competent, and developmentally inclusive strategies that engage youth at highest risk and reduce violence involvement.
Who It Affects
Eligible entities (IHEs, tribal agencies, NGOs serving Tribes, community-based organizations, and non-law-enforcement local governments) and the youth and families they serve, along with the communities implementing prevention work.
Why It Matters
Creates a dedicated federal funding stream for prevention and resilience-building, expanding the network of partners beyond traditional enforcement and focusing resources on high-risk youth.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill creates a federal program directed by the Attorney General to fund youth gun violence prevention efforts. Eligible entities—ranging from colleges and tribal government bodies to community organizations and some local governments that are not law enforcement—would receive grants to run programs designed to prevent gun violence among youth.
Programs must be evidence-informed, trauma-informed, culturally competent, and developmentally inclusive, with a focus on engaging youth at the highest risk and reducing their likelihood of violence. The activities listed in the bill cover trauma healing, youth leadership and empowerment, connections to mental health and mentors, community engagement, and resources for gun safety and re-entry after exposure to violence.
Funding is authorized for 2026 through 2030, with $100 million allocated for grants under the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act, and $25 million of that total set aside specifically for the youth gun violence prevention program. Definitions clarify who may apply for funding and what constitutes relevant terms, including the scope of eligible entities and the role of law enforcement agencies in the broader ecosystem.
In short, the PROSPER Act shifts federal dollars toward preventive, community-based interventions aimed at protecting youth and building resilience.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The Act authorizes the Attorney General to award grants for a youth gun violence prevention program to eligible entities.
Grants must fund programs that are evidence-informed, trauma-informed, culturally competent, inclusive, and aimed at high-risk youth.
Appropriations for 2026–2030 total $100,000,000 for Juvenile Justice Act title V grants, with $25,000,000 reserved for youth gun violence prevention.
Eligible entities include IHEs, tribal government agencies, NGOs serving Tribes, community-based organizations, and some non-law-enforcement local governments.
Definitions cover several entities (IHEs, Tribes, NGOs, community groups) and broadens who can participate, including non-law-enforcement local governments.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Youth Gun Violence Prevention Program Established
The Attorney General is authorized to award grants to eligible entities to carry out a youth gun violence prevention program. The program must use strategies that are evidence-informed, trauma-informed, culturally competent, linguistically and developmentally inclusive, and capable of engaging those at highest risk for gun violence. This section sets the foundation for federal funding and implementation partners.
Authorized Activities
Grants may be used to implement six core activities: (1) prioritize healing from past trauma and life experiences that raise risk; (2) promote youth empowerment through leadership, empathy, and conflict management; (3) connect youth with mental health professionals, mentors, and crisis intervention resources; (4) foster meaningful community engagement and safe environments; (5) connect youth and families with gun safety education, safe storage, and hotlines; (6) support resilience and reintegration for youth with prior exposure to gun violence or involvement in juvenile justice.
Appropriations
For fiscal years 2026 through 2030, the bill allocates $100,000,000 for grants under title V of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act, with $25,000,000 of that amount designated to carry out the youth gun violence prevention program. These funds establish a multi-year federal commitment to prevention-centric, community-based interventions.
Definitions
The bill defines Eligible Entity to include institutions of higher education, Indian Tribe government agencies, NGOs serving Indian Tribes, community-based organizations, and a local government agency that is not a law enforcement agency. It also defines Community-Based Organization, Indian Tribe, Institution of Higher Education, Law Enforcement Agency, ensuring clarity on who can participate and in what capacity.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Justice across all five countries.
Explore Justice in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- High-risk youth gain access to prevention programming designed to reduce violence exposure and involvement; families gain support networks and resources to help youth stay out of violence.
- Community-based organizations receive federal grants to implement evidence-informed prevention strategies, broadening service reach and capacity.
- Institutions of higher education partner with community programs, bringing research, evaluation, and training resources to prevention efforts.
- Tribal governments and tribal organizations obtain dedicated support for culturally appropriate prevention initiatives within their communities.
- Local governments that are not law enforcement can participate as grant recipients, enabling localized prevention efforts and cross-sector collaboration.
Who Bears the Cost
- Grantees incur administrative overhead and compliance reporting requirements to access and manage federal funds.
- Federal program administration and oversight costs accompany the funding, requiring federal and state coordination.
- Some local governments may incur coordination costs and administrative burdens to partner with grantees and align with program reporting.
- Shift toward prevention may entail opportunity costs for agencies traditionally focused on enforcement, as funding and attention pivot to community-based interventions.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is balancing a federally funded trauma-informed, community-based prevention framework with the practical realities of sustaining programs beyond the grant period and ensuring consistent, measurable outcomes across varied local contexts.
The bill’s success hinges on the ability to operationalize a broad coalition of partners outside traditional enforcement. Tensions may arise around coordinating with law enforcement absent a direct enforcement mandate, and around how outcomes will be measured across diverse communities and delivery partners.
Questions remain about long-term sustainability once federal funding ends, how to define and verify “evidence-informed” and “trauma-informed” practices across grantees, and how to avoid duplication with existing juvenile justice and violence prevention programs. Oversight, reporting standards, and equitable access to funding across regions will be essential for credible implementation.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.