The Commission on Women's Affairs of the Puerto Rico House of Representatives held a public hearing on Wednesday, Oct. 15, 2025, on House Bill 677, a measure that would create a Puerto Rico "red de puntos violetas" (network of purple points) — physically identified, safe and accessible locations in public and private entities that offer initial information, confidential orientation and referral to specialized services for survivors of gender-based violence. Representative Odalis González González sponsored the bill and opened discussion at about 9:17 a.m. in chamber room 16.

Supporters and agency witnesses said the bill responds to persistent rates of domestic and gender-based violence and aims to expand first-line access to resources. Nelson Vélez, attorney representing the Office of the Procuradora de las Mujeres (OPM), summarized the OPM analysis and told the commission the office supports the concept but cannot implement the network in its current form without explicit budget allocations. The OPM’s written estimate presented at the hearing placed the first-year implementation cost at about $650,000 and projected annual recurring costs of about $870,000 thereafter to cover personnel, training, a secure digital platform, outreach campaigns and ongoing recertification and inspections.

Why it matters: witnesses emphasized that the points are intended as first-contact locations, not substitutes for specialized services. Testimony focused on three recurring implementation gaps: how to fund the network, what level of training and certification is required for the staff who will serve as first responders, and how the proposed oversight and monitoring would prevent inconsistent practices or revictimization.

Office of Administration and Transformation of Human Resources (OATRH) testimony

Marcos Andrade Ravelo, representing the Office of Administration and Transformation of Human Resources (OATRH), told the commission that the office’s remit is limited to the public workforce and that it can develop and deliver training for public employees through existing alliances with the University of Puerto Rico (UPR). Andrade said the OATRH currently channels a recurring allocation (described at the hearing as an annual $10,000,000 transfer from the general fund to the UPR) for public-employee training and that the office can work with the UPR and other partners on curriculum development for public-sector participants. He and other witnesses cautioned, however, that those funds are restricted to public employees and do not give OATRH authority to certify private-sector personnel.

Training and certification concerns

The bill requires that the coordinating entity — the OPM as written — develop a standardized curriculum and keep a registry of trained personnel. The measure states a minimum initial training of five hours with annual refreshers. Multiple witnesses and legislators said five hours appears insufficient. Nelson Vélez (OPM) and representatives on the panel contrasted the bill’s five-hour minimum with the existing OPM intercesora certification referenced at the hearing, which requires substantially more supervised theory and practice hours (witnesses cited a 40-hour theoretical and 40-hour supervised practical standard used for intercesora certification). Department of the Family representatives and several legislators urged curricula emphasize trauma-informed response, safety planning, referral procedures and protections against revictimization rather than only legal recitals.

Operational scope and partners

Witnesses and legislators discussed where points could be located (municipal offices, pharmacies, supermarkets, universities, faith-based organizations and private businesses) and whether municipalities and community groups could be mobilized as initial pilot sites. OPM representatives said the office is open to collaborative arrangements with municipalities, universities (including student interns and survivor-led groups), nonprofit shelters and community organizations but repeatedly flagged limited staff and budget as constraints to assuming the central coordinating role without appropriation.

Department of the Family and existing programs

Nicole Báez, representing the Department of the Family, described existing federal grant programs the department manages (including ESG and other federal funding streams) and said the department can collaborate but does not have a formal "division of domestic violence" as a discrete line in its current organigram; the department asked the bill’s language be adjusted to reflect its role as a collaborator rather than an implementing unit. Báez also said the department will provide the commission with programmatic and timing recommendations and a more specific cost estimate as requested.

Fiscal, oversight and implementation questions

Luis Roberto Rivera Cruz of the Financial Advisory and Fiscal Agency (AFAF) told the commission that estimated costs need fiscal precision and recommended a comprehensive budget analysis by the legislature’s budget office (OPAL/OGP was discussed) before final approval. Rivera Cruz and other witnesses noted legal and fiscal considerations tied to Puerto Rico’s certified budgets and the Financial Oversight and Management Board (referred to at the hearing as "the junta"). They recommended separating any proposed tax credits or contributory exceptions in the bill for separate consideration (and fiscal review) as part of larger tax-reform efforts.

Other implementation issues raised

- Safety and identification: several legislators asked how points would be identified publicly without alerting aggressors; one legislator suggested discreet flagging systems used in other countries as examples to consider.
- Pilot approach: multiple members suggested starting with a pilot involving municipalities, faith-based groups or university partners before wider rollout. Several survivors’ organizations and student groups (including Siempre Vivas and UPR programs mentioned at the hearing) offered to participate in training and community outreach.
- Monitoring and effectiveness: Department of the Family and other witnesses were asked for evidence about the efficacy of comparable programs and to provide statistics on outcomes for existing federally funded grants. The commission requested data on program effectiveness and on current funding uses for similar services within five to 10 days.

Next steps and deadlines

The commission asked OPM, the Department of the Family, OATRH and AFAF to submit written recommendations and more detailed cost and implementation plans (the chair extended deadlines discussed at the hearing to 10 days for some submissions). Legislators signaled a willingness to amend the bill to add explicit appropriations, to require stronger curricula and recertification standards, and to pilot the program through interagency collaboration.

No formal vote was taken during the hearing. The commission closed the session at 11:31 a.m.

Ending note: Witnesses praised the bill’s goal of increasing safe, low-barrier points of contact for survivors but repeatedly emphasized that concept approval should be tied to specific funding, clearer training and certification standards, and measurable oversight to avoid uneven implementation or harm to survivors.