DHS Has Not Effectively Implemented the Prompt Asylum Pilot Programs January 25, 2021 OIG-21-16 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security Washington, DC 20528 / www.oig.dhs.gov January 2, 2021 MEMORANDUM FOR: Troy Miller Senior Official Performing the Duties of the Commissioner U.S. Customs and Border Protection Tracy Renaud Senior Official Performing the Duties of the Director U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services FROM: Joseph V. Cuffari, Ph.D. Digitally signed by JOSEPH V JOSEPH V CUFFARI Inspector General Date: 2021.01.21 16:33:47 CUFFARI -05'00' SUBJECT: DHS Has Not Effectively Implemented the Prompt Asylum Pilot Programs Attached for your information is our final report, DHS Has Not Effectively Implemented the Prompt Asylum Pilot Programs. We incorporated the formal comments from DHS in the final report. Consistent with our responsibility under the Inspector General Act, we will provide copies of our report to congressional committees with oversight and appropriation responsibility over the Department of Homeland Security. We will post the report on our website for public dissemination. Please call me with any questions, or your staff may contact Thomas Kait, Assistant Inspector General for Special Reviews and Evaluations, at (202) 981-6000. Attachment DHS OIG HIGHLIGHTS DHS Has Not Effectively Implemented the Prompt Asylum Pilot Programs January 25, 2021 What We Found DHS has not effectively implemented the PACR and HARP Why We Did programs. Within the Department, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and U.S. Citizenship and This Review Immigration Services (USCIS) share responsibility for managing PACR and HARP. Because of rapid In recent years, the United implementation and expansion of the programs, DHS States has experienced a components did not adequately consider several factors surge in migrants crossing necessary to support their operations. Specifically, our the southern border to seek initial review and visit to the El Paso sector disclosed: asylum. In October 2019, DHS began pilots of the x few metrics were implemented to measure the Prompt Asylum Claim programs’ effectiveness in meeting goals; Review (PACR) and x a program goal of 7 to 10-day maximum detention Humanitarian Asylum is inconsistent with CBP detention standards and Review Process (HARP) was routinely exceeded; programs to quickly process x due to facility limitations, multiple families were co- migrants with claims of located, with limited assurance of privacy and credible fear. We conducted separation of juveniles from unrelated adults; this review to evaluate DHS’ x consultation areas and legal amenities were not effectiveness to date in conducive to allowing aliens to prepare for credible- implementing the programs. fear screening interviews; This interim report is based x staff resources were inadequate to manage the on observations from our programs; and visit to the El Paso, TX x data systems were not interoperable, necessitating border sector. labor-intensive and error-prone manual efforts to track and share information across components. What We As of April 15, 2020, DHS had deployed the pilot Recommend programs to most sectors on the southern border. Going forward, DHS should consider and take actions to address We made six the issues we identified, to better ensure effectiveness in recommendations to fulfilling mission goals. improve PACR and HARP program implementation. DHS Response For Further Information: DHS officials did not concur with five recommendations Contact our Office of Public Affairs at and concurred with one. We consider these five (202) 981-6000, or email us at [email protected] recommendations unresolved and open and one recommendation resolved and open. www.oig.dhs.gov OIG-21-16 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security Table of Contents Background .................................................................................................... 3 Results of Review ............................................................................................ 8 Few Metrics Were Implemented to Measure Pilot Programs’ Effectiveness.......................................................................................... 8 Program Goal of 7 to 10-Day Maximum Detention Is Inconsistent with CBP Detention Standards and Was Routinely Exceeded....................... 11 Assurance of Privacy and Separation of Juveniles from Unrelated Adults Is Limited at El Paso Facility ................................................................ 13 Consultation Areas and Legal Amenities Are Not Conducive to Allowing Aliens to Prepare for Credible-Fear Screening Interviews ...................... 16 Staff Resources Were Inadequate to Effectively Manage the Programs .. 20 Data System Limitations Entailed Labor-Intensive and Error-Prone Manual Efforts to Track and Share Information ................................... 23 Conclusion.................................................................................................... 24 Recommendations......................................................................................... 25 Appendixes Appendix A: Objective, Scope, and Methodology ................................. 32 Appendix B: DHS Comments to the Draft Report ................................. 34 Appendix C: PACR and HARP Processes Compared to Standard Expedited Removal/Credible Fear Process ........................ 41 Appendix D: PACR and HARP Process Flowchart.................................. 42 Appendix E: Special Reviews and Evaluations Major Contributors to This Report ...................................................................... 43 Appendix F: Report Distribution .......................................................... 44 Abbreviations CBP U.S. Customs and Border Protection C.F.R. Code of Federal Regulations CPC Centralized Processing Center www.oig.dhs.gov OIG-21-16 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security CRCL Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties EOIR Executive Office for Immigration Review FRC Family Residential Center GAO Government Accountability Office HARP Humanitarian Asylum Review Process ICE U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement INA Immigration and Nationality Act OFO Office of Field Operations PACR Prompt Asylum Claim Review POE Port of Entry TEDS National Standards on Transport, Escort, Detention, and Search UAC Unaccompanied Alien Children U.S.C. United States Code USCIS U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services www.oig.dhs.gov OIG-21-16 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security Background The U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Office of Field Operations (OFO) manages U.S. ports of entry where officers perform immigration and customs functions, admitting admissible individuals who have valid documents for legal entry, such as visas or legal permanent resident cards. Between ports of entry, CBP’s Border Patrol detects and interdicts individuals suspected of illegally entering into the United States. Together, OFO and Border Patrol are responsible for providing short-term detention for inadmissible aliens1 arriving in the United States without valid travel documents, in compliance with the National Standards on Transport, Escort, Detention, and Search (TEDS),2 which governs CBP’s interaction with detained individuals. The Department of Homeland Security Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, which works with CBP to design and implement policies, procedures, and guidance to protect the civil and human rights of detainees in DHS custody, actively participated in the development of the TEDS standards.3 Upon encountering inadmissible aliens at or between ports of entry, CBP’s OFO officers and Border Patrol agents generally determine whether to (1) place inadmissible adults and family units4 into expedited removal proceedings,5 or (2) refer them for full removal proceedings before the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR).6 CBP transfers aliens placed into expedited removal proceedings to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for detention. ICE refers aliens who express a fear of persecution, torture, or a fear of return, or otherwise indicate an intention to apply for asylum to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), whose asylum officers conduct a credible-fear screening interview.7 Aliens receiving a positive credible fear 1 Inadmissible aliens are aliens who are ineligible for visas or admission to the United States, including aliens present in the United States without being admitted or paroled, and aliens not in possession of a valid visa, reentry permit, border crossing identification card, or other valid entry document. 8 United States Code (U.S.C.) §§ 1182(a)(6)(A), (7)(A)(i)(I). 2 U.S. Customs and Border Protection, National Standards on Transport, Escort, Detention, and Search, October 2015. 3 Department of Homeland Security Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, Fiscal Year 2015 Annual Report to Congress, June 10, 2016. 4 Unaccompanied alien children are transferred to the custody of the Department of Health and Human Services and are not subject to expedited removal proceedings. 5 Expedited removal generally enables immigration officers to order removal of aliens determined inadmissible under the Immigration and Nationality Act without further review or hearing before an immigration judge. 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(1)(A)(i). 6 8 U.S.C. §§ 1225(b)(1)(A)(ii), (B)(ii). A full removal proceeding, often referred to as a 240 proceeding, is