National Threat Evaluation and Reporting Program Reassignment and Funding Reform Act of 2026
Summary
What This Bill Does
The National Threat Evaluation and Reporting Program Reassignment and Funding Reform Act of 2026 finds that DHS's National Threat Evaluation and Reporting Program primarily serves State, local, Tribal, and territorial partners and is operationally distinct from national intelligence priorities. It directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to transfer the NTER Program from the Office of Intelligence and Analysis to the Office for State and Local Law Enforcement within 180 days.
The Secretary must maintain mission continuity and partner engagement during the transfer, move necessary personnel, assets, equipment, records, and unexpended funds, and ensure the transfer does not reduce capabilities or services for SLTT partners. After the transfer, National Intelligence Program funds may no longer be obligated or spent on NTER. DHS must identify non-NIP funding sources, including State and local programs, preparedness grants, or other relevant nonintelligence funding streams, to support continued operation and expansion under OSLLE.
The Secretary must report to the House and Senate homeland-security committees within 120 days and every 180 days for two years on transfer progress, operational and stakeholder impacts, funding adjustments, challenges, and recommendations. The bill defines I&A, NIP, NTER Program, and OSLLE.
Who Benefits and How
State, local, Tribal, and territorial threat-assessment partners benefit if NTER is managed by the DHS office focused on their law-enforcement coordination and if services continue without capability reductions. OSLLE benefits by gaining responsibility and funding channels for a program aligned with SLTT engagement. DHS preparedness and State-local program offices may benefit from clearer nonintelligence funding alignment.
Who Bears the Burden and How
The Secretary of Homeland Security must execute the transfer, maintain services, move personnel and funds, identify replacement funding, and report repeatedly to Congress. OSLLE must absorb program management responsibilities. I&A loses the program and related resources. DHS nonintelligence funding streams bear the operational and expansion cost after NIP funding is barred. Congressional homeland-security committees must monitor transfer reports for two years.
Key Provisions
- Transfers NTER from DHS Office of Intelligence and Analysis to the Office for State and Local Law Enforcement within 180 days.
- Requires mission continuity and continued SLTT partner engagement during the transfer.
- Moves necessary personnel, assets, equipment, records, and unexpended balances to OSLLE.
- Prohibits National Intelligence Program funds for NTER after the transfer.
- Requires DHS to identify non-NIP funding sources such as State and local programs and preparedness grants.
- Requires reports within 120 days and every 180 days for two years on progress, impacts, funding, challenges, and recommendations.
- Defines I&A, NIP, NTER Program, and OSLLE.
Evidence Chain:
This summary is generated from the full bill text using AI analysis. Expand "Detailed Analysis" below for identified beneficiaries/burden bearers with clause-level evidence links.
At a Glance
What This Bill Does
Transfers DHS's National Threat Evaluation and Reporting Program from the Office of Intelligence and Analysis to the Office for State and Local Law Enforcement and shifts its funding away from National Intelligence Program appropriations.
Key Policy Areas
Homeland Security, State and Local Law Enforcement, Targeted Violence Prevention, Federal Program Funding
Primary Purpose
Transfers DHS's National Threat Evaluation and Reporting Program from the Office of Intelligence and Analysis to the Office for State and Local Law Enforcement and shifts its funding away from National Intelligence Program appropriations.
Policy Domains
Sections 2 and 3 NTER reassignment and funding reform
Identified Gains
- State law enforcement threat-assessment partners
- Local law enforcement threat-assessment partners
- Tribal and territorial threat-assessment partners
- Office for State and Local Law Enforcement
Identified Costs
- Secretary of Homeland Security
- Office for State and Local Law Enforcement
- Office of Intelligence and Analysis
- DHS nonintelligence funding programs
- Congressional homeland-security committees
Sponsors
Legislative Progress
In CommitteeForwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Referred to the Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence.
Referred to the Committee on Homeland Security, and in addition …
Introduced in House
Mr. Evans of Colorado (for himself and Mr. Van Epps) …
Stakeholder Effects
cui bono?How this legislation distributes effects. Mention counts reflect frequency, not effect magnitude.
Congressional homeland-security committees, DHS nonintelligence funding programs, National Intelligence Program appropriations
Positive-direction: National Intelligence Program appropriations, Office of Intelligence and Analysis, State and local threat-assessment partners
Negative-direction: Congressional homeland-security committees, DHS nonintelligence funding programs
Bill Structure & Actor Mappings
Who is "The Secretary" in each section?
- "ia"
- → Office of Intelligence and Analysis
- "sltt"
- → State, local, Tribal, and territorial partners
- "osllee"
- → Office for State and Local Law Enforcement
- "secretary"
- → Secretary of Homeland Security
Key Definitions
Terms defined in this bill
The Office of Intelligence and Analysis of the Department of Homeland Security.
National Intelligence Program as defined in section 3(6) of the National Security Act of 1947.
The DHS initiative to build threat assessment and management capabilities at the State, local, Tribal, and territorial governmental level to prevent targeted violence.
The Office for State and Local Law Enforcement of the Department of Homeland Security.
We use a combination of our own taxonomy and classification in addition to large language models to assess meaning and potential beneficiaries. High confidence means strong textual evidence. Always verify with the original bill text.
Learn more about our methodology