Nationally, about one in three survivors of sexual assault ever report their experiences to law enforcement, according to the Rape, Abuse, & Incest National Network. Texas is betting that gap is partly about what comes after a report, and a new state program now allows rape kits to be tested for DNA without filing a police report.
Texas lawmakers say that gap is what House Bill 1422 was designed to address. The new law took effect in December through a “limited consent for DNA testing program,” allowing survivors to have sexual assault evidence tested without a police report – a shift supporters say could provide answers without forcing survivors into the criminal justice system.
“I am proud to have authored this law to provide another option for survivors to have evidence kits tested,” HB 1422 author state Rep. Lacey Hull, a Houston Republican, wrote in a Texas Department of Public Safety press release. “We know that making a report to law enforcement is a tremendously difficult decision. It is my hope that by providing an alternative testing option, we will empower survivors to subsequently make reports, and ultimately increase prosecutions of sexual assaults.”
Under the new DNA testing program, survivors can undergo a forensic medical exam, have evidence collected, and receive limited DNA results directly through the state’s electronic Track-Kit system. DPS began accepting kits under the program on Dec. 1.
The testing itself is intentionally narrow. Within 90 days of receiving a kit, DPS reports only one result to the survivor: whether foreign DNA was obtained, yes or no. The analysis does not identify whose DNA it is, and the results are not entered into the Combined DNA Index System or shared with law enforcement or prosecutors unless the survivor later files a police report and signs an additional consent form.
Evidence collected under the program is stored for up to five years. After that five-year mark, survivors are notified through Track-Kit and given three months to decide whether to release the evidence to law enforcement before it is destroyed.
The Old System
For years, survivors in Texas could have a sexual assault evidence kit collected without immediately filing a police report. Those kits, often called non-report or anonymous kits, could be stored but not tested unless the survivor later chose to involve law enforcement.
“Survivors would go through a forensic exam, but then the kit would just sit,” said Holly Bowles, director of sexual assault victim advocacy at SAFE Alliance in Austin. “They weren’t able to get any information from it unless they were willing to report.”
SAFE Alliance provides forensic exams, advocacy, counseling, and crisis response services to survivors in Austin and Travis County, and works closely with medical providers and DPS to submit and track sexual assault evidence kits.
For Denise Fonseca, a Hays County survivor of sexual and domestic abuse, the new program does not change the decisions she made years earlier. She never had a forensic exam. Her perspective on the program is shaped by her experience with law enforcement and the consequences of not being believed.
In 2011, Fonseca called the police in Georgia during an incident involving her then-partner. She said officers did not believe her and sent him away for the night. He returned later, and she “paid a huge price.”
“That was the first time I reached out for help, and I wasn’t believed,” Fonseca said.
Years later, during a different incident in Hays County, Fonseca said her interaction with law enforcement was markedly different. Officers responded, took her seriously, and helped her obtain an emergency protective order and immediate protection. That shift, she said, was pivotal in getting her abuser charged.
Fonseca does not oppose the limited-consent testing program. But she is clear about who she believes it is most likely to help.
“I think this would help someone who was unconscious or doesn’t know what happened,” she said.
In cases involving intimate partners or known assailants, she said, DNA does not necessarily resolve the central issue, as survivors’ testimonies are often ignored.
“The question isn’t who did it,” Fonseca said. “It’s whether you’re believed.”
What Advocates Are Seeing
At SAFE Alliance, Bowles said the program is already changing survivor behavior. Since Dec. 1, she said, every survivor who chose a non-report exam at SAFE opted into limited-consent DNA testing with DPS, a group that includes at least five survivors so far.
“That tells us survivors want information,” Bowles said. “We hear from a lot of people who just want to know, ‘Did something happen?’ And there’s no way for us to give them that information. This is one more tool that they might have that can help with that.”
According to Bowles, in 2024, SAFE collected 94 non-report kits that could not be tested under the previous system. The new program removes that barrier, but Bowles said it also raises concerns about capacity.
“This is going to increase the number of kits being tested,” she said. “But there hasn’t been an increase in resources.”
Those concerns aren’t abstract in Austin. According to the National Sexual Assault Kit Initiative, the city began addressing an inventory of more than 3,700 untested sexual assault kits in 2017, a longstanding backlog that had accumulated over years, with the work supported by about $3 million in federal SAKI funding to help inventory and test kits and improve response practices.
Statewide, DPS data shows that as of late November, there were 1,775 unanalyzed sexual assault evidence kits in the Track-Kit system, with 52 kits exceeding the statutory 90-day testing window.
“We’ve seen what happens when kits pile up,” Bowles said. “Survivors are left waiting.”
Fonseca echoed that concern, saying in her experience, delays can leave survivors without answers or protection during the period when decisions on how to proceed are hardest to make.
Expanding Choice Without Expanding Capacity
In a written statement to the Chronicle, the Austin Police Department said survivors have long had the option to have kits collected without filing a report, but that the new process expands that choice.
But APD cannot foresee how this may or may not impact a resurgence in their rape kit backlog.
“At this time, the program is still in its early stages, and it is too soon for APD to assess how it may impact investigations,” APD wrote in the statement.
DPS declined an interview request for this story.
For Fonseca, the program’s value lies in what it does not require.
“Anything that gives survivors more control is a step in the right direction,” she said. “But trust isn’t built by policy alone.”
For Bowles, the measure of success will depend on whether the system can sustain the demand it is creating.
“This option matters,” she said. “But it only works if survivors aren’t left waiting for answers again.”
With HB 1422 now in effect, survivors have a new way to seek the answers they deserve without involving police. Whether the program leads to lasting change or contributes to new testing backlogs is something advocates, lawmakers, and survivors say they will be watching closely.
This article appears in January 9 • 2026.