i

HOMELAND SECURITY ADVISORY

COUNCIL

Final

Emergency Interim Report

CBP Families and Children Care Panel

April 16 , 2019 
ii

This page is intentionally left blank.
iii

This publication is presented on behalf of the Homeland Security Advisory Council, CBP Families 

and Children Care Panel, Chaired by Administrator (Ret.) Karen Tandy, Drug Enforcement 

Administration and Vice Chaired by Jayson Ahern, Principal and Head of Security Services, The 

Chertoff Group, as the Emergency Interim Report to the (A) Secretary of the Department of 

Homeland Security, Kevin McAleenan.

<SIGNATURE OBTAINED FOR PDF COPY>

Karen Tandy Jayson Ahern

Administrator (Ret.) Principal and Head of Security Services

Drug Enforcement Administration The Chertoff Group
iv

This page is intentionally left blank.
v

CBP FAMILIES AND CHILDREN CARE PANEL SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERS

Karen Tandy (Chair) Administrator (Retired), Drug Enforcement Administration 

Jayson Ahern (Vice Chair) Principal and Head of Security Services, The Chertoff Group 

Stewart Baker Partner, Steptoe & Johnson

Robert Bonner Principal, Bonner ADR Services

Theresa Cardinal Brown Bipartisan Policy Center, Director of Immigration and CrossBorder Policy

John Clark CEO, National Center for Missing and Exploited Children

Sharon W. Cooper, MD FAAP Developmental and Forensic Pediatrician, Womack Army

Medical Center, Fort Bragg

Leon Fresco Partner, Holland and Knight

Jim Jones Chairman, Monarch Global Strategies

Wendy Smith-Reeve Deputy Director, Arizona Department of Emergency and

Military Affairs, Director, Division of Emergency 

Management

HOMELAND SECURITY ADVISORY COUNCIL STAFF

Matthew Hayden, Executive Director, Homeland Security Advisory Council

Mike Miron, Deputy Executive Director, Director, Homeland Security Advisory Council 

Catherine Fraser, Supervisory CBP Officer, Homeland Security Advisory Council 

Sarahjane Call, Intern, Homeland Security Advisory Council

Colleen Silva, Intern, Homeland Security Advisory Council
vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 1

KEY FINDINGS........................................................................................................................ 1

KEY RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................................. 2

INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 4

KEY FINDINGS............................................................................................................................. 6

EMERGENCY RECOMMENDATIONS...................................................................................... 9

CONCLUSION............................................................................................................................. 16

APPENDIX A: FAMILY UNIT APPREHENSION DATA........................................................ 17

APPENDIX B: PANEL MEMBER BIOGRAPHIES .................................................................. 18

APPENDIX C: TASK STATEMENT.......................................................................................... 23

APPENDIX D: SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS AND OTHER WITNESSES ......................... 25

APPENDIX E: MEETINGS AND SITE VISITS ........................................................................ 29

APPENDIX F: REFERENCES .................................................................................................... 30

APPENDIX G: GLOSSARY........................................................................................................ 34
1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

There is a real crisis at our border. An unprecedented surge in family unit (FMU) migration from 

Central America is overwhelming our border agencies and our immigration system. This crisis is 

endangering children. In too many cases, children are being used as pawns by adult migrants and 

criminal smuggling organizations solely to gain entry into the United States (U.S.). Because 40% 

of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), U.S. Border Patrol’s (USBP) resources are 

currently absorbed in dealing with this crisis, the USBP is not able to effectively manage its other 

border security missions -- apprehending migrants illegally seeking to evade detection, including 

criminal aliens and those who pose a public safety or national security threat, uncovering instances 

of trafficking, fraudulent family relationships and other criminal activity among this population, 

and monitoring the border for drug smuggling and other contraband. To cover this gap, CBP will 

need to re-assign an increasing number of CBP officers stationed at ports of entry to assist the 

USBP in handling the surge in FMU migration.

The surge in FMU migration will continue to soar, endangering more and more children making 

the treacherous 2,000 mile trek to our border and crossing illegally into the U.S. at dangerous and 

remote areas between ports of entry (POE), until the dynamics causing this trend are changed. This 

change requires emergency action by the U.S. Government (USG). The changes proposed by this 

bipartisan Panel, if all of our recommendations are implemented, could dramatically reduce 

migration of FMUs from Central America, help to eliminate dangerous and illegal border 

crossings, as well as improve the care of children who are brought on this harrowing journey by an 

adult. Implementing these recommendations is essential for the safety and welfare of children 

living in Central America and elsewhere who will continue to make this dangerous trek and risky 

border crossing until the USG implements the emergency actions we propose.

Key Findings

As the findings in our report reflect, the large-scale influx of FMUs is new, having increased 

dramatically in the last year by 600%. Over 53,000 FMU were apprehended last month alone by 

the Border Patrol, and at the current trajectory, that number of FMU apprehensions is likely to 

exceed 500,000 in Fiscal Year (FY) 2019.

After being held for several days at inadequate and overcrowded holding areas at USBP stations, 

most of the adults -- provided they have a child with them and have stated that they fear returning 

to their country of origin -- are issued Notices to Appear (NTA) at a later time before an 

immigration judge somewhere in the U.S. and then dropped at a local bus station or delivered to 

already overwhelmed non-profit shelters. The NTA, combined with long delays in the adjudication 

of asylum claims, means that these migrants are guaranteed several years of living (and in most 

cases working) in the U.S. Even if the asylum hearing and appeals ultimately go against the 

migrant, he or she still has the practical option of simply remaining in the U.S. illegally, where the 

odds of being caught and removed remain very low. A consequence of this broken system, driven 

by grossly inadequate detention space for family units and a shortage of transportation resources, is 

a massive increase in illegal crossings of our borders, almost entirely driven by the increase in 

FMU migration from Central America.
2

By far, the major "pull factor" is the current practice of releasing with a NTA most illegal migrants 

who bring a child with them. The crisis is further exacerbated by a 2017 federal court order in 

Flores v. DHS expanding to FMUs a 20-day release requirement contained in a 1997 consent 

decree, originally applicable only to unaccompanied children (UAC). After being given NTAs, we 

estimate that 15% or less of FMU will likely be granted asylum. The current time to process an 

asylum claim for anyone who is not detained is over two years, not counting appeals.

Key Recommendations

To address this crisis in the near term, we recommend a different model for processing FMUs who 

have crossed our border illegally. While this model cannot be fully implemented without 

Congressional support, some parts of the model can and should be implemented by the executive 

branch now and without delay, while Congress considers and enacts the emergency legislation and 

supplemental appropriation recommended below. Although our full recommendations are 

reflected in the Interim Report, highlights of our key recommendations are as follows:

Regional Processing Centers:

1. Establish and staff 3 to 4 Regional Processing Centers (RPCs) along the border, scalable 

and with sufficient capacity to shelter all FMUs apprehended at the border and, among 

other things, provide safe and sanitary shelter, to include medical screening and care, 

credible fear examinations, vetting for identity and familial relationship, and evaluationsfor 

public health and safety, national security and flight risk.

2. Resource and require transport from USBP stations and POEs of all FMUs to an RPC, 

within 24 hours or less of apprehension.

3. Recommendations 1 and 2 will require an emergency supplemental appropriation with 

funding to cover the costs of, among other things, erecting and staffing the RPCs, 

transportation to RPCs to meet the 24-hour requirement and providing health care for 

minors. We recognize that this may require a supplemental of several billions of dollarsfor 

construction and administrative costs, but it is the only way to ensure treatment of migrant 

children that conforms to our values.

4. Until the RPCs can be established, steps should be taken immediately to relieve the POEs 

and USBP of all tasks unrelated to their law enforcement mission. That is, all 

transportation, medical, feeding and caring for migrants should be the responsibility of nonCBP professionals who provide such services, whether by contract or applicable emergency 

government relief services. These are national security costs that should be included in the 

emergency supplemental budget request.

Congress Should Enact Emergency Legislation to:

5. Achieve Faster Asylum Processing. At a minimum, legislation is needed to modify asylum 

procedures, at least temporarily, so that a hearing and decision can be provided to family 

members within 20 or 30 days. We also are recommending that Congress immediately fund 

a substantial increase in immigration judges.

6. "Flores Fix" -- Roll back the Flores Decision by exempting children accompanied by a 

parent or relative, who is acting as the guardian of the child. DHS also should be given 

discretion to detain a close relative with a non-parent family member when this is in the 

best interest of the child.
3

7. Amend Section 208 of the Immigration Nationality Acts (INA) to require that border 

crossers make asylum claims at POEs. Simultaneously, CBP will be resourced to begin 

processing all asylum claims initially presented at a POE and put an end to metering.This 

can and should occur promptly after this recommendation and Recommendations 1 and 2, 

above, are implemented.

8. Amend the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (TVPRA) to permit 

repatriation of any child when the custodial parent residing in the country of origin requests 

reunification and return of the child. Currently, this is not permitted by the statute.

Emergency Regulatory Action:

9. Enable CBP to take photographs and biometrics of children of any age in order to stem the 

recycling of children at the border and to rapidly determine the legitimacy of parentage 

claims.

10. Because the expansion of Flores is contributing to the flow of accompanied children, many 

who are of tender age, DHS should act promptly to limit it by emergency regulation until 

Congress acts on Recommendation 6 above.

Medical and Child Exploitation Safeguards:

11. Office of Field Operations (OFO) POEs and USBP stations should be supplemented by 

contracted medical and transport professionals.

International Action:

12. Enter into a North America Family Protection Initiative with Mexico that includesthe 

elements of a Safe Third Agreement.

13. In cooperation with Guatemala, establish a secure shelter to process asylum claimants from 

Central America in Guatemala, proximate to the Guatemala-Mexican border.
4

INTRODUCTION

By letter of October 4, 2018, then Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kirstjen 

Nielsen asked the Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC) to examine the care of families 

and children in the temporary custody of CBP, including its component division, the USBP.1 The 

HSAC created a CBP Family and Child Custody Panel (hereafter the “Panel”) as a subcommittee 

of the HSAC to “provide findings and recommendations on the best practices of other federal, state 

and local organizations regarding care for families and children in CBP custody.” As part of the 

Secretary’s direction, the Panel was directed to conduct border visits and interviews to observe and 

understand CBP’s “unique operating environment and infrastructure,” meet with experts to identify 

best practices for the processing and care of children in custody, and recommend any needed 

changes to CBP policies, procedures or training.

Since its inception approximately five months ago, the Panel increased its membership to include a 

practicing pediatrician who is a national expert on the maltreatment of children. Overall, the tenmember Panel is politically bipartisan and comprised of experts in the various areas under review. 

Almost half are lawyers with one previously a federal judge. The Panel includes two former 

Commissioners of CBP, two former Administrators of the Drug Enforcement Administration, 

former officials of DHS and the Department of Justice (DOJ) who are immigration policy legal 

experts, the Director of Immigration and Cross-Border Policy with the Bipartisan Policy Center, a 

former U.S. Ambassador to Mexico who also served in leadership positions in Congress and the 

White House in a prior Administration, the Chief Executive Officer of the National Center for 

Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) and former Director of the U.S. Marshal’s Service, and 

the Deputy Director of the Arizona Department of Emergency and Military Affairs, Director, 

Division of Emergency Management.2

The Panel has met in person and telephonically multiple times to interview more than 109 subject 

matter experts who included multiple medical professionals, the American Academy of Pediatrics, 

dozens of representatives from CBP, DHS, Health and Human Services (HHS) and the DOJ, as 

well as various stakeholders, more than 17 Non-Government Organizations (NGO), and 3 global 

protection organizations. Notably, the Panel conducted multi-day site visits to every state along 

the Southwest Border (SWB) with a focus on the areas suffering from some of the larger influxes 

of families and children illegally entering the U.S. Specifically, the Panel visited 6 of the 9 USBP 

SWB sectors to include 10 USBP stations and 4 POEs within the OFO, reviewed numerous reports 

by multiple Inspectors General and the Government Accounting Office, and gathered and reviewed 

a prodigious amount of data from the various subject matter experts.3

On February 28, 2019, this Panel reported its early findings confirming the crisis at the SWB – on 

both national security and humanitarian grounds – urging that our country and migrant children are

1

See Appendix C. DHS Secretary Nielsen’s signed HSAC Tasking Memo, Four New Homeland Security Advisory 

Council (HSAC) Taskings, October 4, 2018. As the Panel’s report was being written, Secretary Nielsen resigned and 

on April 10, 2019, then CBP Commissioner Kevin K. McAleenan assumed the position of Acting Secretary of 

Homeland Security.

2 See Appendix B. Panel Member Biographies.

3 See Appendix D - Subject Matter Experts and Other Witnesses, Appendix E - Meetings and Site Visits and Appendix 

F - References.
5

in serious danger.4 Over the past several months, DHS and CBP have introduced a number of 

important measures to address the crisis independently of the Panel. However, with the situation at 

the border reaching catastrophic levels, this bipartisan Panel believes our recommendations cannot 

await our final report in May 2019. This interim report and our emergency recommendations 

address the most urgent needs regarding the custody and care of family and children populations 

and those necessary to restore CBP to its primary law enforcement mission to protect our 

homeland security by controlling our Nation’s borders.

Although CBP has already implemented some of the recommended emergency measures, such as 

increased health screenings for all children apprehended at the border, it is still phasing in medical 

professionals so not all stations have them or have them 24/7, leaving those stations without to 

meet these requirements, in part, by diverting medically trained CBP personnel from their 

enforcement duties. A solution to the broader problem requires us to look beyond CBP to all the 

resources of DHS, to include not just CBP but also Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) 

Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 

(USCIS), and indeed to the whole of the U.S. government, all three branches. It quickly became 

apparent to the Panel that the primary problem is the continuing surge of FMUs from Central 

America to our borders and that properly caring for this population and stemming this flow, in 

order for CBP to return to its critical homeland security mission, requires an urgent whole of 

government effort if there is to be any hope of mitigating dangers to children who are brought to 

our border as FMUs. This issue has consumed the Panel’s energy and efforts. Its solution requires 

emergency action.

4 See U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Homeland Security Advisory Council Public Teleconference Call 

Subcommittee Progress Update February 28, 2019, transcript of telephonic report to the HSAC. 

https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/February%2028%2C%202019%2C%20Executive%20Summar%2

0Final.pdf
6

KEY FINDINGS

1. We commend the men and women of CBP, including the OFO officers and USBP agents, for 

their unfaltering devotion to duty and professionalism during this crisis. There are countless 

examples of their valiant attempts to aid families and children who have entered our country 

illegally and still attempt to perform their law enforcement mission to protect our country. 

However, it is not humanly possible to do both. On any given day, CBP is at half strength or 

less “on the line” in places at the border, endangering themselves and the country. Turned on 

its head, CBP personnel are instead tending to the daily needs of thousands of illegal 

migrants who CBP has already processed but is left holding for days and sometimes weeks in 

confinement space that was built decades ago and designed to confine only a fraction of these 

illegal migrants for hours, not days or weeks, and certainly not intended to confine tender age 

children. One of the highest priorities must be to immediately relieve CBP of all tasks 

unrelated to its law enforcement mission. The security of our country is at grave risk until 

then.

2. Tender age children are at the heart of the crisis. Most, 73%, of the children in FMUs 

illegally crossing our border are tender aged, being 12 or younger.

3. The unabated 600% surge of FMUs from Central America to our borders and properly caring 

for this population have overwhelmed the entire government and brought our border security 

and immigration management systems to the point of collapse. Although the increase in 

FMUs began in FY2014, it has recently spiked, after a significant drop in FY2017. In March 

FY2017, FMU apprehensions accounted for less than 1% (.3%) of all USBP apprehensions. 

Currently, they constitute nearly 60% (57.6%) of all apprehensions.5

4. Apprehensions by USBP, currently at levels not seen in a decade, will approach one million 

in FY19 unless actions are immediately taken.

5. Migrant children are traumatized during their journey to and into the U.S. The journey from 

Central America through Mexico to remote regions of the U.S. border is a dangerous one for 

the children involved, as well as for their parent. There are credible reports that female 

parents of minor children have been raped, that many migrants are robbed, and that they and 

their child are held hostage and extorted for money.

6. Criminal migrant smuggling organizations are preying upon these desperate populations, 

encouraging their migration to the border despite the dangers, especially in remote places 

designed to overwhelm existing USBP infrastructure, and extorting migrants along theway, 

thereby reaping millions of dollars for themselves and the drug cartels who also charge 

money to cross the border.

7. A substantial number of families and children are entering our country in remote areas ofthe 

border versus the POEs, enduring dangerous and terrifying crossings in remote desert areas, 

across rivers, over fences, and through razor wire. These children increasingly require 

significant personal and medical care that exceeds the ability and capacity of CBP even with 

their current patchwork of contracted assistance. Despite CBP’s creative and humane 

attempts to care for these children during their confinement, CBP facilities, both at USBP 

stations and POEs, are grossly inadequate.

5 See Appendix A – Family Unit Apprehension Data
7

8. Families should not be separated during detention, but current laws do not give CBP 

discretion to keep children together with a grandparent or other close relative acting in a 

guardian-type role other than their parent.

9. FMUs illegally crossing our border consist of adults who are bringing a child with them, and 

most are being released into the U.S. with a NTA due to a shortage of detention capacity for 

FMUs.

10. Children who are crossing the borders of the U.S. are at great risk for multiple medical 

problems, which include but are not limited to, dehydration, malnutrition, infections, 

psychological trauma, physical injuries and all aspects of child maltreatment. Many of these 

sequelae are not necessarily evident within the context of a non-medical evaluation. An 

expectation for clinical acumen by CBP agents and officers is highly unrealistic. Even 

medical personnel need to have a higher level of expertise to anticipate some of the potential 

infectious disease complications that can be found in this population of children.

11. It is unrealistic to have doctors at every USBP station where a large group of families may or 

may not show up on a given day. However, each POE and USBP station should be provided 

ancillary contracted medical support 24/7 during operational hours6 -- e.g., Pediatric or 

Family Medicine Nurse Practitioners and/or Physician Assistants, Physicians enrolled in 

Graduate Medical Education or Department of Defense (DOD) health care providers in 

training with appropriate supervision from their medical treatment facilities. An examination 

room should be made available for these providers and equipped appropriately, to include 

exam tables and equipment designed to prevent the transmission of communicable diseases.

12. Until the RPCs are established, the USBP will continue to be dependent on community 

emergency rooms and other medical facilities, as well as local emergency transport systems, 

which, in turn, significantly and negatively impacts the USBP mission and manpower.

13. Some adults accompanied by a child revealed during CBP processing, that they were 

encouraged to bring a child with them by criminal smuggling organizations that are paid to 

transport the migrant and child to the U.S. border from Central America.

14. Children are being exploited and placed in danger in many ways –

• Adults fraudulently claiming parentage to a child to gain entry to the U.S. are increasing.

• Some children are being re-cycled by criminal smuggling organizations, i.e. returned to 

Central America to accompany a separate, unrelated adult on another treacherous journey 

through Mexico to the U.S. border.

• Human traffickers have extracted additional fees as a form of indentured servitude from 

FMUs who were released with NTAs and made their way to the interior of the U.S.

• The risk for commercial sexual exploitation of these children and teens is predictably 

high and will be very difficult to prevent after transport or release into the interior U.S.

15. More recently, with the expanding crisis, CBP directed that FMUs be released with a NTA 

within a few days after their surrender to the USBP and preliminary processing. None of 

these migrants released with a NTA have been given a credible fear interview prior to their 

release, because there are no USCIS credible fear examiners at USBP stations. Further, these 

FMUs are not detained by ICE ERO due to their lack of capacity to detain FMUs. ICE ERO 

has effective capacity to detain only 2,500 FMUs, and that capacity is woefully inadequate 

given the surge in FMU migration over the past year. Those relatively few FMUs that ICE

6 Until the appropriate contracts are established, services could be rendered under the National Response Framework, 

Emergency Support Function #8 Public Health and Medical. Health and Human Services is the lead agency and has 

multiple alternatives at their disposal within the federal government to support fulfillment of this requirement.
8

ERO does detain, however, are given credible fear examinations if they express a fear of 

return to their home countries.

16. Given recent decision rates, only a small percentage of FMUs being released with NTAs are 

being granted asylum (including the number of persons given NTAs who do not end up 

actually filing an asylum claim). Of those who actually file asylum claims, whether they 

have crossed the border or are visa overstays, approximately 80% ultimately are not granted. 

During the first quarter of FY19, the DOJ Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) 

reports that less than 15% of the asylum claims of Central Americans who have been given a 

credible fear interview are actually granted.7 Despite the interests of the U.S. in enforcing the 

court ordered removal of unsuccessful asylum seekers, very few non-detained asylum 

claimants whose claims are denied are actually ever located and deported from the U.S.

17. Based on EOIR data for non-detained asylum applicants, it takes, on average, 2.5 years 

before an asylum claim is adjudicated by an immigration judge. For cases that are appealed, 

either to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) or further to the federal district courts, it 

can be up to five years before a final decision is reached. An appeal to the BIA on average 

adds another 8 months to the process, extending the process for final adjudication of an 

asylum claim to over 3.3 years. In cases where a U.S. Court of Appeals then grants a stay of 

removal, it can take up to another 2 years for the final appeal to be decided. This meansthat 

an individual or family seeking asylum can remain in the U.S. for 4-5 years pursing an 

unmeritorious case before a removal order can be executed.

18. The dramatic increase in FMU apprehensions over the past year is directly linked to the U.S. 

government -- executive, legislative and judicial branches -- creating “pull factors” that 

incentivize migrants to bring a child with them to gain entry to and release into the U.S.

19. In the short term, CBP is doing triage. It has already re-assigned 545 CBP OFO officers to 

assist USBP. Currently, approximately 6,643 (40%) of the 16,608 USBP agents assigned to 

the SWB are diverted to processing, holding, medical care, transport, and hospital watches 

relating to the surge of FMUs. Currently, CBP has only 6,889 CBP officers at the POEs on 

the SWB. If all CBP officers were assigned to assist the USBP, there would be no CBP 

officer to staff the POEs and none to do the processing of legitimate trade and travel from 

Mexico. This crisis, unless controlled soon, could well cause the shutdown of these POEs.

20. The emergency recommendations outlined below are not a panacea, standing alone. 

However, without rapid action, our border enforcement and immigration management efforts 

will continue to collapse under the weight of continuously increasing FMUs from Central 

America and elsewhere and be a magnet for criminal elements seeking entry to the U.S., 

placing many more children in danger.

7 See EOIR Adjudication Statistics as of January 30, 2019, at https://www.justice.gov/eoir/page/file/1111476/download
9

EMERGENCY RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Emergency Legislative Recommendations

a. Enact emergency legislation to limit the scope of the Flores consent decree to 

unaccompanied minors.8

b. Amend Section 208 of the INA to require border crossers to present asylum claims at a U.S.

POE, unless extraordinary circumstances exist that preclude this.9

c. Amend the TVPRA to permit repatriation of a child to a custodial parent in their country of 

origin, provided this can be safely done.

d. Amend current law to allow DHS to exercise discretion to keep together a FMU of a child 

and other than a parent or legal guardian with one degree of separation, e.g., grandparent, 

uncle, etc., except in circumstances when there is apparent danger to the child of such an 

arrangement.

e. Enact an emergency supplemental funding bill to cover costs associated with adopting our 

recommendations. Working with DHS and other impacted departments of government, the 

Office of Management and Budget (OMB) should promptly submit an emergency 

supplemental budget request to fund the foregoing.

2. Emergency Regulatory Changes

a. Amend 8 CFR Section 235.1 to remove the exemption of “Aliens younger than 14.... on 

date of admission” to enable CBP to take photographs and biometrics of children of any 

age in order to stem the recycling of children at the border and to rapidly determine the 

legitimacy of parentage claims.

b. Because the expansion of Flores is contributing to the flow of accompanied children, many 

who are of tender age, DHS should act promptly to limit it by emergency regulation until 

Congress acts on Recommendation 1a above.

8 Emergency legislation is needed that limits Flores to unaccompanied minors, but if such legislation is delayed, we 

recommend that this be done by emergency regulation that, because of the FMU migration crisis, dispenses with 

ordinary Notice and Rulemaking. The emergency regulation would recognize that, unlike UACs, in some cases FMUs 

must be held beyond 20 days in order to (1) determine whether there is an actual parental relationship, (2) establish 

identity, (3) conduct (an unhurried) credible fear interview, (4) make sure the child's healthcare is examined and any 

issues, especially communicable diseases are taken care of before release for the sake of the child and to assure public 

health is not threatened in interior urban areas to which the FMUs intend to alight upon release, (5) keep the FMUs 

intact if it is ineligible for asylum or otherwise, (6) schedule expeditious chartered repatriation for those who are 

subject to expedited removal, and/or (7) for those eligible after credible fear interview, and based on a release more 

time to effect a safe and orderly re-settlement. Whether a Flores roll-back is by emergency regulation or as part of 

emergency legislation, this recommendation is too important and too urgent to reducing risk to accompanied children 

to be delayed any longer. The lives of children who will be making the treacherous journey are at risk.

9 Section 208 of the INA currently permits a border crosser to make an asylum claim by placing a foot anywhere on

U.S. soil. The federal courts have made clear that a law of Congress is necessary to change this, i.e., INA Section 208 

cannot be changed by Presidential proclamation or executive order. Only Congress can change this law, and it should 

do so without delay as part of emergency legislation needed to protect children from dangerous crossings across the 

border. We do not exaggerate when we say that the lives of tender aged children are at stake and at risk every day 

Congress fails to act to amend Section 208.
10

3. Temporary Regional Processing Centers (RPCs) for All FMUs

a. Establish 3-4 temporary, scalable processing centers along the SWB.

b. Transport all FMU migrants to the nearest RPC as soon as possible but no later than 24 

hours after apprehension by USBP between POEs and CBP officers at POEs.10

c. Require all processing at the RPCs – e.g., criminal, identity and parentage/DNA checks, 

medical screenings and mitigation of health risks by health care professionals and, until a 

Rapid Adjudication of FMUs asylum claims can be put in place, credible fear 

examinations.

d. Establish an accelerated “rocket-docket” process for asylum claims of FMUs once the 

Flores legislative fix is in place and its 20-day limitation on accompanied minors is 

removed. This expedited process will provide for Rapid Adjudication of Family Unit 

Asylum Claims at the RPCs with co-located USCIS asylum officers, immigration judges 

with no other docket, interpreters, and ICE Attorneys. DOJ on an emergency basis must 

add several hundred immigration judges dedicated solely to the FMUs asylum claims 

docket. This rapid asylum processing, when in place, will substitute for credible fear 

examinations, but still lead to the rapid removal of FMUs who do not qualify for asylum. 

Consideration also should be given to the temporary creation of a unit of government 

(EOIR) funded immigration counsel (similar to public defenders) as utilized in the 2014-15 

surge.

e. Until the RPCs can be established, steps should be taken immediately to relieve the POEs 

and USBP of all tasks unrelated to their law enforcement mission. That is, all 

transportation, medical, feeding and caring for migrants should be the responsibility of nonCBP professionals who provide such services, whether by contract or applicable emergency 

government relief services. These are national security costs that should be included in the 

emergency supplemental budget request.

This RPC recommendation warrants brief elaboration. It contemplates that within 45 days, 

DHS, with full support of other departments of government, including the DOD,11 will 

establish temporary, scalable regional detention/processing space (RPCs) at 3 or 4 locations 

proximate to the SWB. The RPCs may consist of tents or other non-permanent structures that 

can rapidly be put in place. The requirement is that that these RPCs have sufficient bed, 

quarantine infirmary space to detain all FMUs apprehended at or near the SWB for a minimum 

of 20 days. All locations are to be sited within approximately 250-300 miles at their furthest 

from any spot on the SWB. Possible locations include Rio Grande Valley, El Paso, Yuma and 

immediately available current and excess military bases. Establishment of the first RPC should 

begin immediately, within 30 days.

10 As noted in our Findings, the transportation and detention system for FMUs has collapsed due to the huge numbers of 

FMUs illegally crossing the U.S. border. Assuring rapid 24-hour or less transport, not just from USBP stations but also 

POEs, will have the collateral benefit of substantially increasing the through put of FMU through POEs and shorten wait 

times. Additional costs for transport to meet the 24-hour requirement shall be included in the Emergency Supplemental. 11 DOD or Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) should be immediately tasked to erect the RPCs, 

possibly on existing or excess military property or on existing government owned properties, working in coordination 

the General Services Administration (GSA). Whichever agency constructs the RPCs, and however the initial funds are 

re-allocated or re-programmed to get this started immediately, should be reimbursed via an Emergency Supplemental 

appropriation.
11

The RPCs should have sufficient medical staff with physicians specializing in Pediatric or 

Family medicine, nurse practitioners and physician assistants, licensed social workers, mental 

health professionals, and dieticians. Health care evaluations will require some aspect of 

laboratory and field level X-ray support. These health officials should consider issuing a 

medical “passport” for children exiting the custody of RPCs that identifies significant medical 

problems as well as any immunizations provided before their release, which would be 

beneficial to destination communities and their public health systems and avoid the very high 

risk of these children becoming lost to monitoring.

Our recommendation contemplates that DHS will operate and manage the RPCs as a whole of 

DHS effort. That is to say, staffing to manage the processing will be provided by CBP, both 

USBP and OFO, ICE ERO and USCIS. Staffing costs and TDY are to be included in the 

Emergency Supplemental. Required processing,12 including medical screening by healthcare 

professionals will take place at RPCs.

If this and our other emergency legislative recommendations are adopted, we would expect a 

sharp decline in the number of FMUs apprehended by the USBP in remote and treacherous 

areas of our border in less than 12 months. In other words, DHS will be able to scale back some 

of the RPCs and/or some of their capacity within 12 months. That is why we do not envision 

RPCs as permanent structures. However, if we only establish RPCs, while they will help meet 

our humanitarian responsibilities, they alone, although costly, are not likely to substantially 

reduce the surge in FMU migration.

4. Rapid Adjudication of Asylum Claims of Family Units at RPCs

a. Co-locate USCIS asylum officers at RPCs.

b. Until this recommendation can be fully implemented together with a Flores fix, conduct 

credible fear examinations of FMUs expressing fear of return to their home country and use 

expedited removal to repatriate those who are not found to have a credible fear of 

persecution to qualify for asylum.

c. Increase the number of Immigration Judges by another 300 with the single goal ofresolving 

all FMU asylum claims at the immigration court stage within twenty days or less.13 Assist

12 Required Processing at RPCs. As a matter of DHS policy, no NTAs shall be issued without up to 20-day processing 

that includes medical examinations and credible fear determinations being made at an RPC. All FMUs will get medical 

screenings by health care professionals. They will also receive security screenings, including establishing identity and 

family relationship, before being released into the interior of the U.S. Any public health issues that could impact 

populated interior areas of the U.S. relating to contagious diseases and the like will be assessed at a RPC by public 

health professionals and be mitigated before release. RPCs will have separate space for quarantining illegal migrants 

with infectious diseases. Criminal history of the adult, including in his/her country of origin, will be checked and 

evaluated for potential criminality before release into the interior of the U.S. Likewise any and all national security 

concerns are to be addressed before release. An assessment must be made regarding whether there is a true parental 

relationship, including where appropriate through interviews and DNA testing. Part of the processing at the RPC 

should include capturing photographs and the most cost effective biometric identifiers (e.g., Rapid DNA, iris, finger or 

vein scans) of all children and family members to determine if children are being repeatedly trafficked across the 

border and as a check on family fraud.

13 To assist in ramping up the number of additional immigration judges, consideration should be given to establishing a 

reserve corps of retired immigration judges willing to serve in a temporary duty capacity.
12

this goal by providing counsel to individuals without counsel so that they cannot obtain 

continuances due to lack of counsel.

d. Co-locate immigration judges at the RPCs or provide immigration court proceedings at the 

RPCs via remote video.

e. New immigration judges should be assigned to prioritize FMU asylum claims. They should 

have no other cases on their docket until FMU cases are decided.

f. Consider temporary or permanent statutory changes to streamline and expedite the 

adjudication of FMU asylum claims.

g. Narrow Grounds for Asylum Claims -- the Attorney General should use his authority to 

limit grounds for asylum claims to be coterminous with, but not exceed U.S. treaty 

obligations.

The overall objective of these recommendations is to restore a system capable of prioritization 

and rapid resolution of asylum claims made by FMUs. One of the greatest deterrents to FMU 

migration would be the relatively prompt repatriation of FMUs to their country of origin when 

they do not qualify for asylum. Since the majority would not likely qualify for asylum, it would 

be best if this decision could be made earlier, before they are given NTAs and are released into 

the interior of the U.S.

5. Near-term International Actions by the U.S.

a. North American Family Protection Initiative, Safe Third Agreement andBilateral 

Cooperation with Mexico

DHS, with full assistance and support of the State Department and other elements of the federal 

government, should propose and negotiate a North American Family Protection Initiative 

(NAFPI) that includes the essential elements of a Safe Third Agreement with Mexico14 and 

also calls for bilateral cooperative and coordinated efforts with Mexico to address “push 

factors” in the Northern Triangle countries of Central America.

A bilateral agreement with Mexico is the single most important action capable of managing the 

movement of FMUs from Central America into Mexico and ultimately across its border into 

the U.S. Correctly understood, such an agreement would be in the best interests of both the

U.S. and Mexico15 and, as it will result in a more orderly, safer and managed process for

14 We have had a safe third agreement with Canada for years. Such an agreement postulates that if a person is truly

escaping death or persecution in, say, Guatemala, he must make his asylum claim in the first safe country in which he 

alights, that is, Mexico. The likely effect of a Safe Third agreement is to dramatically reduce the number of migrants 

with a child in tow from Central America. To the extent that Mexico requests it, the U.S. should provide assistance to 

Mexico for housing and expanding its asylum processing capacity in connection with its agreement to Safe Third. The 

importance of a Safe Third Agreement, and its recognition of the capacity of the government of Mexico to implement 

it, speaks volumes regarding how far Mexico has come in developing its democracy and institutions and the strength of 

the Mexico-U.S. bilateral relationship. Without a safe third agreement, it will be necessary for CBP to re-direct a 

significant number of CBP officers from our nation’s POEs, including those who process commercial shipments and 

people into the U.S. from Mexico, to USBP stations and Regional Processing Centers or “RPCs”. 15 The benefits to Mexico from such an agreement may not be apparent, but they are substantial. The reality is that 

many Northern Triangle FMU migrants are making the journey to reunite with family or escape poverty and are 

unlikely to qualify for asylum in the U.S. If a Safe Third arrangement is agreed to, it is contemplated that Mexico will 

enhance its process for asylum so that it is substantially equivalent to ours and that Mexico will provide appropriate 

protection for asylees in its territory. Although Mexico has also seen an increase in asylum claims from the Northern
13

requesting asylum in either country, it would also be in the best interests of children and 

vulnerable migrants currently subjecting themselves to criminal smugglers and dangerous 

journeys.

b. Establish a Secure RPC Facility in Guatemala

The USG should negotiate an agreement with Guatemala that provides appropriate USG 

support to the government of Guatemala, whereby the United States is permitted to promptly 

erect a safe and secure RPC-type shelter in Guatemala, proximate to the Guatemala-Mexico 

border, that permits processing by the USG of asylum claimants from the Northern Triangle 

nations in Guatemala.

This safe and secure processing center, like the RPCs in the U.S., should be staffed by USCIS 

asylum officers and immigration judges on site or by video and provide the asylum seekers 

with appropriate security, health and social services. This step would obviate the need for 

parents to risk his or her child on a perilous journey through Mexico to dangerous U.S. border 

crossing areas.

6. Recommendations for Medical and Child Exploitation Safeguards

a. OFO POEs and USBP stations should be supplemented by contracted medical and transport 

professionals, with Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) trained agents and officers 

utilized only as a last resort.

In many cases, there will be value in having pediatric and other medical professionals on call 

for telemedicine consultations and even examinations. This requires privacy, examination 

basics, bandwidth, and a set of contractual relationships with doctors who understand the 

exigencies of USBP detention and transportation. These relationships could be established 

through university Graduate Medical Education programs, though appropriate Internet support 

will be necessary. That said, none of the Panel believes that USBP can ever be expected to 

safely handle serious medical emergencies on a no-notice basis. Contracted transport to and 

treatment by medical professionals is the only realistic option for serious injury or disease.

b. Video-monitoring surveillance should be installed at all POEs, USBP stations and RPCs 

with multiple warnings of this surveillance to all children in CBP custody to assist in the 

prevention of situational child sexual abuse. In the event of a possible completed sexual 

assault, remote forensic examination technology already exists to accomplish an acceptable 

examination and such medical evaluations are already a standard of care in severalstates.

Triangle, such an agreement might not mean that Mexico would continue to see the vast numbers that are currently 

leaving the Northern Triangle countries and illegally crossing Mexico’s southern border. If the majority of the Central 

American FMUs are seeking entry into the U.S., not Mexico, then the understanding that they would be expected to 

make their claims in Mexico rather than in the U.S. may itself change their decision to migrate.
14

c. Implement CBP Training, as follows:

• CBP personnel should be professionally trained to focus specifically on physical 

evidence of illness for the brief period between apprehension and transfer of the FMUs 

to the RPCs or other agencies. Some signs of such illnesses are only able to be noted 

from history provided by parents and caregivers. The specific areas which should be 

noted if at all possible, would be severe respiratory symptoms (e.g. coughing, shortness 

of breath, wheezing, cyanosis etc.), fever, severe gastrointestinal symptoms (e.g. 

persistent vomiting and/or diarrhea with particular attention to bloody diarrhea), and 

skin rashes or facial swelling that might indicate highly infectious diseases such as 

measles, mumps or chickenpox. The necessity for quarantine must be considered when 

these diseases become apparent.

• Training regarding the vulnerabilities to and indicators of Child Sexual Exploitation and 

Effective Responses to Missing Migrant Children by leveraging NCMEC Resources.16

• Procedures and training for CBP personnel to report incidents of suspected child sexual 

abuse/exploitation directly to the NCMEC CyberTipline, which is the national 

clearinghouse and portal for reporting suspected incidents of child sexual abuse.

7. DHS Commander/Coordinator

The Acting DHS Secretary should consider designating a high level, knowledgeable, whole of 

DHS operational Commander with full authority to act on his behalf, and with the full support 

of the White House, to engage and coordinate an interagency process to assure a whole of USG 

approach to achieve the foregoing goals – e.g., the rapid construction of RPCs, staffing the 

RPCs with personnel from the various government agencies required for its success, redirecting and utilizing personnel of DHS component agencies to staff the RPCs, and assuring 

that the 24 hour transportation requirement is met, etc. Other executive branch departments to 

be engaged include DOD, DOJ, and HHS, in order to optimally coordinate actions needed to 

achieve the emergency goal as quickly as possible.

The DHS Commander/Coordinator would be needed on a temporary (6-12 month) basis to 

marshal the resources of DHS, and secure support from other departments and agencies, to 

focus them squarely on fixing the problem. Part of the breakdown that led to FMUs being held 

for longer periods in USBP custody than is desirable and to the release of FMUs with NTAs 

without even a credible fear interview or other vetting, is the division of roles and 

responsibilities within DHS among CBP, ICE and USCIS. In addition to leading the 

interagency process, the DHS Commander/Coordinator also would be responsible for leading 

the unity of effort among these DHS components and others, such as FEMA. Given the fact 

that one or more federal departments or agencies are needed and/or already providing support, 

calling upon FEMA should be considered. The National Response Framework (NRF) and its

16 NCMEC’s 35-year history of providing a comprehensive approach to help find missing children, reduce child sexual 

exploitation, and prevent child victimization can be leveraged to inform and support training efforts. Best practices 

have been identified through NCMEC’s provision of analysis, technical assistance, victim support services, case 

management services, trends, and indicators. Migrant children who are placed with sponsors, extended family, or 

social services may run away from those placements and possess many risk factors and vulnerabilities for sexual 

exploitation. CBP, social workers, sponsors, and foster parents could help ensure prevention practices are taking place, 

indicators are recognized and best practices for response are known in an effort to better protect migrantchildren.
15

fundamental principles also may be applicable specifically during a time of crisis, as here. 17

The goal of this coordinated inter and intra agency DHS led team would be to manage, care for, 

and within 6-12 months, dramatically reduce the number of FMUs illegally entering the United 

States.

17 This whole of DHS and federal enterprise effort fully aligns with Presidential Policy Directive 8 (PPD-8): National 

Preparedness, and Homeland Security Policy Directive-5 (HSPD-5): Management of Domestic Incidents.

Specifically, HSPD-5 states “The Secretary shall coordinate the Federal Government's resources utilized in response to 

or recovery from terrorist attacks, major disasters, or other emergencies if and when any one of the following 

conditions applies: (3) more than one Federal department or agency has become substantially involved in responding 

to the incident; or (4) the Secretary has been directed to assume responsibility for managing the domestic incident by 

the President. DHS.gov. (2019, April 04). Homeland Security Presidential Directive 5. Retrieved April 07, 2019, from 

https://www.dhs.gov/publication/homeland-security-presidential-directive-5 The following emergency support 

function (ESF) areas, within the NRF, are minimum recommendations for immediate implementation to help address 

this humanitarian crisis: ESF #5: Information and Planning (DHS/FEMA) which includes coordination amongst all 

federal departments/agencies supporting the RPC; ESF #6 Mass - Care to support feeding, sheltering and other 

resources for proper health and hygiene for migrants, as well as succint coordination with external NGO and FaithBased Organizations supplementing support following migrant release from ICE-ORO (DHS/FEMA); ESF #7 

Logistics to address needs such as transportation, acquisition of RPC locations and security services that do not require 

a badged agent (i.e. monitoring during hospital treatment or stays for migrant population), etc (DHS/FEMA); ESF #8 

Public Health and Medical to provide appropriate medical screening/care, immunizations, social work, and 

psychological screening (HHS); and ESF #15 External Affairs (DHS) and unified public messaging.
16

CONCLUSION

This is the Panel’s interim report. Given the steadily increasing severity of this humanitarian crisis, 

the Panel believes it a matter of great urgency to provide the Secretary with these emergency 

recommendations for immediate action without further delay. In due course, we will issue a final 

report on or about May 21, 2019, which will provide our longer term recommendations.
17

APPENDIX A - FAMILY UNIT APPREHENSION DATA

Figure 1

Figure 2
18

APPENDIX B – PANEL MEMBER BIOGRAPHIES

Karen Tandy (Chair)

Administrator (Ret.), Drug Enforcement Administration

Initially Appointed by Secretary Jeh Johnson – May 2016

Karen Tandy served as the Administrator of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) 

from July 2003 to November 2007. During her tenure, the DEA saw unprecedented improvements 

in its performance and accountability standards. Ms. Tandy is also a former Associate Deputy 

Attorney General for the Department of Justice (DOJ), where she was responsible for developing 

national drug enforcement policy and strategies. She held a variety of positions in the Criminal 

Division at DOJ and was an Assistant U.S. Attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia and the 

Western District of Washington. In 2007, she became the Senior Vice President of International 

Government Affairs for Motorola Solutions Inc., where she worked as Motorola’s top public 

policy spokesperson. In that role, she oversaw Motorola’s country management, governance, and 

compliance issues in over 70 countries, and worked on telecommunications policy and trade 

regulation issues. Ms. Tandy has a B.S. in Education and a J.D. from Texas Tech University. Ms. 

Tandy is licensed to practice law in Texas and Virginia.

Jayson P. Ahern (Co-Chair)

Principal and Head of Security Services, The Chertoff Group

Initially Appointed by Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen – September 2018

Jay Ahern is the Principal and Head of Security Services at The Chertoff Group. In this role, he 

advises clients on a broad range of issues including homeland and border security management, 

global commerce and supply chain security, critical infrastructure protection, risk management, 

and strategic planning/ implementation.

Mr. Ahern served as a law enforcement professional for 33 years and as the former Acting 

Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) at the Department of Homeland 

Security. During his time as Acting Commissioner, Mr. Ahern was responsible for securing, 

managing, and controlling our nation’s borders. With service in both domestic and foreign 

locations, he directed the agency’s 58,000 employee workforce to keep terrorists and terrorist 

weapons out of the country, while also carrying out CBP’s other border-related responsibilities. 

At The Chertoff Group, Mr. Ahern understands the dangers that face America and American 

businesses operating around the world. He counsels global clients on how to effectively manage

risk while incorporating a proper mix of people, processes, and technology to achieve their security 

goals. Through an intelligence-driven approach, he advises clients on how to secure their most 

critical assets, train and exercise employees to respond to emergency incidents, and create sound 

frameworks to optimize security operations.

Stewart A. Baker

Partner, Steptoe & Johnson

Initially Appointed by Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen – September 2018

Stewart A. Baker is a partner in the Washington office of Steptoe & Johnson LLP. He is the former 

Assistant Secretary of Policy at DHS. At DHS, Mr. Baker created and staffed the 250-personnel 
19

DHS Policy Directorate. He was responsible for policy analysis across the Department, including 

the Department’s International Affairs, strategic planning and relationships with law enforcement, 

and public advisory committees. This work required a broad understanding of all aspects of the 

Department’s activities, including; maritime regulation, customs enforcement, immigration 

enforcement, identity management, implementation of the SAFETY Act, money laundering 

enforcement, government contracts, and regulation of travel and air transportation.

Robert C. Bonner

Principal, Bonner ADR Services

Robert C. Bonner is a retired partner of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher international law firm and 

formerly the senior principal of the Sentinel HS Group, LLC, a Washington, D.C.-based homeland 

security consulting firm that provides strategic advice regarding homeland and border security 

issues. He is currently the principal of Bonner ADR Services. Mr. Bonner has held several 

positions in the federal government. In September 2001 Mr. Bonner was appointed Commissioner 

of the U.S. Customs Service, and served until 2006 as the first Commissioner of U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection (CBP). Mr. Bonner is also a former Administrator of the Drug Enforcement 

Administration (DEA), U.S. District Judge and United States Attorney for the Central District of 

California. He was the chair of the California Commission on Judicial Performance and currently 

serves on the board of trustees of the California Institute of Technology. Mr. Bonner received a

B.A. from the University of Maryland, College Park in 1963 and a J.D. from Georgetown 

University Law Center 1966.

Theresa Cardinal Brown

Bipartisan Policy Center, Director of Immigration and Cross-Border Policy

Theresa Cardinal Brown is BPC’s director of immigration and cross-border policy. She came to 

BPC from her own consulting firm, Cardinal North Strategies, LLC.

Brown was director of immigration and border policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce; associate 

director of business immigration advocacy at the American Immigration Lawyers Association; and 

worked in the immigration practices of large Washington, D.C.-based law firms. She also served as 

a director and of counsel at The Sentinel HS Group, LLC.

She was a policy advisor in the office of the commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 

and was on Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff’s Second Stage Review of USCIS. In 

2005 and 2006, she became a member and later director of the Immigration Legislation Task Force 

in the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Office of Policy. She then served as the first DHS 

director of Canadian affairs, and subsequently as the first DHS attaché at the U.S. Embassy in 

Ottawa.

Brown does extensive media outreach in her role at BPC, including appearances on Fox News, 

NPR Morning Edition, PBS NewsHour, CNN International, and BBC World.

Brown is a Phi Beta Kappa graduate of the University of Delaware, with a degree in international 

relations and economics.

John Clark

CEO, National Center for Missing and Exploited Children

John F. Clark, former director of the United States Marshals Service and longtime child advocate, 

is the president and CEO of the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children.
20

After an extensive nationwide search, NCMEC’s Board of Directors unanimously chose Clark to 

lead the nonprofit organization, which was designated by Congress in 1984 to work in partnership

with the U.S. Department of Justice on issues related to missing and exploited children. He took the 

helm of the Alexandria, Virginia-based organization on Dec, 7, 2015.

Clark, whose career with the USMS spanned 28 years, was appointed in 2006 as its ninth director 

by then-President George W. Bush and confirmed by the Senate. In 2011, Clark joined Lockheed 

Martin Corp. as its director of security, where he managed a $24 million budget and led a 

workforce of 250 professionals for the nation’s largest defense contractor.

As director of the U.S. Marshals Service, Clark oversaw the daily operation of 94 district offices, 

218 sub-offices, three foreign field offices and seven regional fugitive task force offices. He 

managed a $2.5 billion budget and led a diversified workforce of 5,500 employees.

Clark implemented and administered Title I of the Adam Walsh Child Safety and Protection Act, 

which directed the USMS to locate and apprehend fugitive sex offenders. He also oversaw the 

implementation and operation of the National Sex Offender Targeting Center. He forged strong 

relationships with law enforcement leaders at the federal, state and local levels and served on many 

boards, including NCMEC’s.

Among the many awards Clark has received is the “Lifetime Achievement Award” from the 

Federal Bar Association in recognition of superior service in protecting members of the judicial 

branch. The Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association honored him as “Federal Law 

Enforcement Director of the Year” for his superior leadership of the USMS.

Before joining the USMS, Clark worked for the U.S. Capitol Police and the U.S. Border Patrol. He 

earned a bachelor’s of science degree from Syracuse University

Sharon W. Cooper, MD FAAP

Developmental and Forensic Pediatrician, Womack Army Medical Center, Fort Bragg, 

North Carolina

Sharon Cooper is a developmental and forensic pediatrician who evaluates and treats children who 

have been victims of all forms of abuse, though her primary area of expertise is that of sexual 

exploitation. Dr. Cooper holds faculty positions at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, 

Department of Pediatrics and the Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences in Bethesda, 

Maryland.

She is a consultant and Board member of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. 

She is also a member of the Expert Working Group on Children who Experience Violence in 

Cyberspace, of the Baltic Seas. She has lectured nationally and internationally, and has provided 

Congressional testimony in the United States, Russia, Manitoba Canada, and Italy on child sexual 

exploitation. She has spoken at the European Commission on a safer Internet and is the lead author 

of one of the most comprehensive text on child sexual exploitation. Dr. Cooper provides training to 

numerous national and international investigative agencies in the area of Internet and 

Communication Technology crimes against children.

Dr. Cooper recently served as a Task Force member on the Defending Childhood-Children 

Exposed to Violence report, having been appointed by Attorney General Eric Holder. She actively 

evaluates victims of child abuse images and the commercial sexual exploitation and has been 

qualified as in expert witness in more than 300 court proceedings. She regularly provides training 

for multidisciplinary teams who work on child maltreatment cases and provides particular attention 

to all forms of sexual exploitation. She continues to provide medical care for children with 

disabilities and serves in several organizations which work towards the prevention of child 

maltreatment.
21

Leon Fresco

Partner, Holland and Knight

Leon Fresco is an immigration attorney in Holland & Knight's Washington, D.C., office where he 

focuses his practice on providing global immigration representation to businesses and individuals. 

He also represents clients in administrative law and government relations matters and has extensive 

appellate, commercial litigation and legislation experience. Mr. Fresco was the primary drafter of 

S.744, the U.S. Senate's comprehensive immigration reform bill of 2013. He uses his broad range 

of experience to develop creative solutions to achieve his clients' objectives, which often may 

involve multistage representation before administrative agencies, federal courts and Congress.

Prior to joining Holland & Knight, Mr. Fresco was the Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the 

Office of Immigration Litigation at the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Civil Division. In this 

position, Mr. Fresco provided litigation risk assessments to cabinet members in Executive Branch 

agencies. He also oversaw all civil immigration litigation on behalf of the federal government, 

including representation of the DOJ, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. 

Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) and the U.S. 

Department of State (DOS). This involved supervision of more than 350 attorneys working on 

nearly 10,000 cases per year. He also advised and assisted client agencies in drafting immigration 

regulations. In this capacity, and prior to entering government service, Mr. Fresco argued 

extensively in six of the federal appellate circuit courts, including several en banc arguments.

Prior to joining the DOJ, Mr. Fresco was the staff director for the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee 

on Immigration, handling matters involving immigration, refugees and border security, including 

managing the subcommittee's oversight functions involving the DOJ, DHS, HHS, DOL and DOS. 

He was the principal advisor to Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), former chairman of the 

subcommittee, on all aspects of immigration law and policy. During his time on the subcommittee, 

Mr. Fresco drafted several pieces of legislation, including the 1) Border Security, Economic 

Opportunity and Immigration Modernization Act, 2) the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and 

Compensation Reauthorization Act, 3) the Emergency Border Security Supplemental 

Appropriations Act and 4) the Israel E-2 Visa Bill.

Mr. Fresco was an associate and a Chesterfield Smith Fellow in Holland & Knight's Miami office 

prior to his work in Washington, D.C. He also served as a law clerk to the Honorable Daniel T.K. 

Hurley of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. In October 2018, Mr. Fresco 

was appointed to the Customs and Border Protection Families and Children Care Panel 

Subcommittee of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Advisory Council, where he is 

serving as a subject matter expert.

Jim Jones

Chairman, Monarch Global Strategies

Initially Appointed by Secretary Janet Napolitano – May 2012

Jim Jones is the Chairman and CEO of Monarch Global Strategies. Jones provides business 

development advice and consulting for clients primarily in Mexico and Latin America. He 

previously served as U.S. Ambassador to Mexico from 1993 to 1997. He also served as President 

at Warnaco International, and Chairman and CEO of the American Stock Exchange in New York 

from 1989 to 1993. As a member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Oklahoma from 1973 

to 1987, Ambassador Jones was Chairman of the House Budget Committee and ranking member of 

the House Ways and Means Committee. Ambassador Jones was only 28 years old when President
22

Lyndon Johnson selected him as Appointments Secretary, the White House position presently 

titled Chief of Staff.

Wendy Smith-Reeve

Deputy Director, Arizona Department of Emergency and Military Affairs, Director, Division 

of Emergency Management

Initially Appointed by Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen – September 2018

Wendy Smith-Reeve began her tenure as Director of the Arizona Division of Emergency 

Management in May 2013, assuming the duties of Deputy Director of the Arizona Department of 

Emergency and Military Affairs (DEMA) in November 2013.

As Director of Emergency Management, Ms. Smith-Reeve manages the state's emergency 

preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation efforts. She joined DEMA's Division of 

Emergency Management in September 1996 as a finance specialist for the Public Assistance 

Program within the Recovery Section. She was progressively promoted through the section and 

became Assistant Director for the Recovery Section in 2009. During her tenure at DEMA, Ms. 

Smith-Reeve has supported and managed state response and recovery efforts for 100 state disaster 

declarations and 12 presidential disaster declarations.

In April 2015, the Emergency Management Accreditation Program reaccredited Arizona in 

affirmation that the state's emergency management program meets industry-recognized national 

standards.

Ms. Smith-Reeve is a current member and former president of the Arizona Emergency Services 

Association. She is also a member of the National Emergency Management Association (NEMA) 

and formerly served as NEMA President. She also supports and serves on multiple committees, 

councils, and coordinating groups.
23

APPENDIX C – TASK STATEMENT
24

D. CBP Families and Children Custody Panel:

The CBP Families and Children Custody Panel is to provide findings and recommendations 

on the best practices from Federal, State, and local organizations regarding care for families 

and children in CBP custody. The Panel's mandate will include, but is not necessarily limited 

to, the following:

1. Conduct visits to observe CBP operations and review non-privileged information to

understand CBP's unique operating environment and infrastructure, as well as the legal and

funding requirements as they relate to individuals held in CBP custody. Such visits shall be

conducted in a way that protects the privacy interests of those in CBP custody and privileged

information.

2. Study relevant aspects of care for individuals in short-term custody, particularly 

children, including through interviews with academic experts and non-governmental 

organizations, literature reviews and studies, site visits, and assessments of best practices that 

might be applied to such environments.

3. Identify best practices from Federal, State, and local law enforcement regarding 

interactions with the family and children populations, including during arrests, processing, 

and short-term detention. This should include identifying how these best practices are 

implemented.

4. Provide recommendations regarding any potential additions or changes to CBP

policies, procedures, or training related to custody of the family and children populations, 

including any metrics that would permit CBP to measure successful implementation of the 

additions or changes.
25

APPENDIX D - SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS AND OTHER WITNESSES

Subject Matter Experts and Other Witnesses

1. Santa Acuna, Catholic Diocese, McAllen, TX

2. Sidney Aki, Port Director, San Ysidro Port of Entry, OFO, CBP

3. Chancey Arnold, (A) Assistant Chief, San Diego Sector, USBP, CBP

4. Nathalie Asher, Executive Associate Director, ERO, ICE

5. Kay Bellor, Vice President for Programs, Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service

6. Carl S. Campbell, Deputy Executive Director, Operations, OFO, CBP

7. Dr. Duane Caneva, Chief Medical Officer, DHS

8. Michael Cariker, Special Operations Supervisor, San Diego Sector, USBP, CBP

9. Victor Cavazos, Team Brownsville, McAllen, TX

10. Frank Carrillo, Patrol Agent In Charge, Chula Vista Station, USBP, CBP

11. Marco Cervantes, Patrol Agent In Charge, Santa Teresa Station, USBP, CBP

12. Samuel Cleaves, Assistant Port Director, El Paso Port of Entry, OFO, CBP

13. Eric Crouston, Branch Chief, San Ysidro Port of Entry, OFO, CBP

14. Desi DeLeon, Patrol Agent In Charge, Yuma Station, USBP, CBP

15. Jeff Demont, Chief of Staff, San Ysidro Port of Entry

16. Dr. Alexander Eastman, Senior Medical Officer, DHS

17. Alysa Erichs, Deputy Executive Assistant Director, HSI

18. Ashley Feasley, Director of Policy, U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops

19. Rhonda Fleischer, Program Specialist, Migration Program Division, UNInternational 

Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF)

20. Gerardo Galvan, (A) Patrol Agent In Charge, Lordsburg Station, USBP, CBP

21. Ruben Garcia, Director, Annunciation House, El Paso, TX

22. Ricardo Garza, Texas Civil Rights Project, McAllen, TX

23. George Gomez, Strategic Communications Branch, El Paso Sector, USBP, CBP

24. David Gonzalez, Port Director, Hidalgo Port of Entry, OFO, CBP

25. Luis Gonzalez, Esq. Immigration Staff Attorney, HIAS Border Fellow Jewish Family 

Service of San Diego

26. Beverly Good, Port Director, El Paso Port of Entry, OFO, CBP

27. Salvador Guerrero, Deputy Patrol Agent In Charge, Santa Teresa Station, USBP, CBP

28. Joyce Hamilton, Angry Tias and Abuelas, McAllen, TX

29. Tamar Magarik Haro, Senior Director, Federal and State Advocacy, American 

Academy of Pediatrics

30. Matthew Harris, Patrol Agent In Charge, Clint Station, USBP, CBP

31. Brian Hastings, Chief Patrol Agent, Law Enforcement Operations Directorate, USBP, 

CBP

32. David Higgerson, Director Field Operations, Laredo, OFO, CBP

33. Jennifer Higgins, Associate Director, USCIS
26

34. Todd A. Hoffman, Executive Director, Admissibility and Passenger Processing,OFO, 

CBP

35. Christina Patino Houle, Equal Voice Network, McAllen, TX

36. Randy J. Howe, Executive Director, Operations, OFO, CBP

37. Aaron Hull, Chief, El Paso Sector, USBP, CBP

38. Lindsay Jenkins, Protection Officer, UNHCR Regional Office for the USA and the 

Caribbean, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights

39. Tae Johnson, Assistant Director, ERO, ICE

40. Larry Jones, Deputy Patrol Agent In Charge, Clint Station, USBP, CBP

41. Peter Jaquez, Patrol Agent In Charge, El Paso Station, USBP, CBP

42. Shawn Jordan, Special Operations Supervisor, Yuma Headquarters, USBP, CBP

43. Brian Kastoll, CPC Commander, El Centro Station, USBP, CBP

44. Carl Landrum, Deputy Chief Patrol Agent, Yuma Sector Headquarters, USBP, CBP

45. Michael Lata, Patrol Agent In Charge, Laredo Station, USBP, CBP

46. Susan Law, Angry Tias and Abuelas, McAllen, TX

47. Veronica Lazano, (A) Executive Officer, El Centro Station, USBP, CBP

48. Ronald LeBlanc, Patrol Agent In Charge, Deming Station, USBP, CBP

49. Scott Lloyd, Director, ORR, HHS

50. Hector Maesa, Deputy Patrol Agent In Charge, Lordsburg Station, USBP, CBP

51. Hector Mancha, Director Field Operations, El Paso, OFO, CBP

52. Anne Maricich, Deputy Director Field Operations, San Diego, OFO, CBP

53. Mariza Marin, Watch Commander, San Ysidro Port of Entry, OFO, CBP

54. Ruben Martin, Watch Commander, San Diego Headquarters, USBP, CBP

55. Kevin K. McAleenan, Commissioner, CBP

56. Kirsty Macdonald, Protection Coordinator, Regional Delegation for the United States 

and Canada, International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)

57. James McHenry, Director, EOIR, DOJ

58. Luis Mejia, Director, Enforcement Programs Division, Admissibility and Passenger 

Processing, OFO, CBP

59. Paul Minton, Program Manager, Admissibility and Passenger Processing, OFO, CBP

60. Henry Moak, Juvenile Coordinator, CBP

61. John Morris, Division Chief, RGV CPC, USBP, CBP

62. Kerry Neal, Senior Child Protection Advisor, UN International Children’s Emergency 

Fund (UNICEF)

63. Greg Nevano, Assistant Director Programs, HSI

64. Cain Nunez, Deputy Commander, CPC El Centro Station, USBP, CBP

65. Jamie Ortiz, Texas Rio Grande Legal Aid, McAllen, TX

66. Raul Ortiz, Deputy Chief Patrol Agent, RGV Sector, USBP, CBP

67. Todd Owen, Executive Assistant Commissioner, OFO, CBP

68. Olivia Peña, Young Center, McAllen, TX

69. Sister Norma Pimentel, Catholic Charities, McAllen, TX
27

70. Anthony Porvaznik, Chief Patrol Agent, Yuma Sector Headquarters, USBP, CBP

71. Ray Provencio, Assistant Director Field Operations, El Paso, OFO, CBP

72. Carla Provost, Chief, USBP, CBP

73. Carmen Qualia, Assistant Chief Patrol Agent, RGV CPC, USBP, CBP

74. Cameron Quinn, Director, Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties

75. Narcizo Ramos, Special Operations Supervisor, Laredo North Station, USBP, CBP

76. Dr. Irwin Redlener, Director, National Center For Disaster Preparedness, Columbia 

University

77. Patricia Renteria, Program Director, Casa Presidente, Southwest Key, Brownsville, TX

78. Jolene Reynaga, Watch Commander, San Luis Port of Entry, OFO, CBP

79. Carlos Rodriguez, Director, Southern Operations Command, Hidalgo Port ofEntry, 

OFO, CBP

80. Silvia Rodriguez, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties

81. Matthew Roggow, Associate Chief, Law Enforcement Operations Directorate, USBP, 

CBP

82. Joe Romero, Supervisory Border Patrol Agent, Sector Communications, USBP, CBP

83. Victor Roosen, Regional Disaster Officer, American Red Cross, San Diego Region

84. Andrea Rudnick, Team Brownsville, McAllen, TX

85. Adam Ruiz, Patrol Agent In Charge, Hebbronville Station, USBP, CBP

86. Raul Ruiz M.D., Congressman, California

87. Rosa San Luis, Fuerza del Valle, McAllen, TX

88. Danielle Salgado, Young Center, McAllen, TX

89. Eduardo Sanchez, Assistant Chief, Headquarters, USBP, CBP

90. Ofelia De Los Santos, Catholic Diocese, McAllen, TX

91. John Schwamm, Area Port Director, San Luis Port of Entry, OFO, CBP

92. Charles Seagroves, Deputy Patrol Agent In Charge, Deming Station, USBP, CBP

93. Staca Shehan, Executive Director, Case Analysis Division, National Center for Missing 

and Exploited Children

94. Cory Shindel, Deputy Director of Policy, Kinds in Need of Defense

95. Bradd Skinner, Assistant Director Field Operations, Laredo, OFO, CBP

96. Bernardino Soto, (A) Deputy Patrol Agent In Charge, San Clemente Station, USBP, 

CBP

97. Dr. David Tarantino, Chief Medical Officer, CBP

98. Clayton Thomas, Deputy Patrol Agent In Charge, El Paso Station, USBP, CBP

99. Katie Tobin, External Relations – U.S. and Western Hemisphere, UN High 

Commissioner for Human Rights Regional Office for the USA and the Caribbean

100. Brandy Urbine, Program Analyst, CBP

101. Karla Vargas, Texas Civil Rights Project, McAllen, TX

102. Lupita Vargas, Catholic Diocese, McAllen, TX

103. Roy Villareal, Deputy Chief Patrol Agent, San Diego Sector, USBP, CBP

104. Jay Visconti, Senior Advisor, Commissioner’s Office, CBP

105. Marianela Watson, Good Neighbor, McAllen, TX
28

106. Pat Whipple, Deputy Patrol Agent In Charge, El Centro Station, USBP, CBP

107. Jack White, Good Neighbor, McAllen, TX

108. Ross Wilken, Assistant Chief Patrol Agent, San Diego Sector, USBP, CBP

109. Hector Zuniga, Regional Executive Director, Southwest Key, Brownsville, TX
29

APPENDIX E – MEETINGS AND SITE VISITS

In Person Meetings:

• FCCP Subcommittee Members held an in person meeting in Washington, DC, which 

included participants from CBP, ICE, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, and HHS.

• FCCP Subcommittee Members held a meeting in Washington, DC, which included 

participants from CBP; USCIS; DOJ, EOIR; ICE ERO and HSI; National Center for 

Missing and Exploited Children; and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGO) to include 

Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service; U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops; 

American Academy of Pediatrics; and Kids in Need of Defense.

Site Visits to CBP Facilities, Other Government Agencies and Non-Government

Organizations:

• Members conducted their first site visit to CBP facilities:

o OFO: San Ysidro and San Luis Port of Entry.

o USBP: Chula Vista, El Centro, and Yuma Stations.

o Meetings also held with local NGOs:

American Red Cross, CRCL, and Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS) Border 

Fellow Jewish Family Services.

• Members conducted a second site visit to CBP facilities:

o OFO: Hidalgo International Bridge Port of Entry.

o USBP: Laredo, Hebbronville, RGV Ursula Central Processing Center Stations.

o Meetings also held with:

 10 different local NGOs.

 Health and Human Service Office of Refugee Resettlement Facility – Casa 

Presidente, Southwest Key.

• Members conducted a third visit to the El Paso region:

o OFO: Paso Del Norte Port of Entry.

o USBP: Clint, Paso Del Norte, Santa Teresa, and Deming Stations.

o Meeting also held with The Annunciation House, El Paso.

FCCP Meetings:

• Participated in a briefing provided by the CBP Commissioner and USBP Chiefregarding 

the recent death of a child apprehended by CBP.

• Held a meeting with the DHS/CBP Medical Operations Team who provided a briefing on 

the medical screening process for children in CBP custody.

• Held meeting with Congressman Ruiz, M.D., from California, who provided a briefing 

regarding legislation he is introducing on medical care and custody.

• Held a conference call with the following global protection organizations:

o International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).

o UN International Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF).

o UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNHCR).

• Held a conference call with Dr. Irwin Redlener, Director, National Center for Disaster 

Preparedness, Columbia University.
30

APPENDIX F – REFERENCES

Abbott, D., Commander J. White, de la Pena, C. M., Gambler, R., Gelernt, L., Larin, K. A., 

Maxwell, A.,Podkul, J., Shonkoff, J. P. (2019). “Examining the Failures of the Trump 

Administration’s Inhumane Family Separation Policy”. The Subcommittee on Oversight 

and Investigations of the Committee on Energy and Commerce held testimony with key 

speakers. https://energycommerce.house.gov/committee-activity/hearings/hearing-onexamining-the-failures-of-the-trump-administration-s-inhumane

Allen, S. (2015). On-site Investigation Report – Dilley I, February 2015. 

Allen, S. (2015). On-site Investigation Report – Dilly II, July 2015.

Allen, S. (2015). On-site Investigation Report – Karnes I, January 2015. 

Allen, S. (2015). On-site Investigation Report – Karnes II, May 2015.

Allen, S. (2016). On-site Investigation Report – Dilley III, July 2016. 

Allen, S. (2016). On-site Investigation Report – Karnes III, July 2016. 

Allen, S. (2017). On-site Investigation Report – Dilley IV, September 2017.

Allen, S. (2017). On-site Investigation Report – Karnes IV, September 2017.

Amnesty International. (2018). USA: ‘You Don’t Have Any Rights Here’ Illegal Pushbacks, 

Arbitrary Detention & Ill-Treatment of Asylum-Seekers in the United States.

Attorney General William P. Barr (9 April 2019). The Fiscal Year 2020 Department of Justice 

Budget Request.

CBP. (2015). U.S. Customs and Border Protection: National Standards on Transport, Escort, 

Detention, and Search. https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2017-

Sep/CBP%20TEDS%20Policy%20Oct2015.pdf

CBP. (2017). U.S. Customs and Border Protection Juvenile Coordinator Report. 

CBP. (2018). Letter Addressed to Erika Guevara-Rosas.

CBP. (2018). Operational Process for Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC). 

CBP. (2018). RFI to Amnesty International.

CBP. (2019). CBP Interim Enhanced Medical Efforts. 

CBP. (2019). C1 Enhanced Medical Efforts.

CBP Statistical Tracking and Analysis Team. (2019). CBP Southwest Border Enforcement Actions 

Total – Apprehensions and Inadmissibles FY14-19U.S.

CBP Statistical Tracking and Analysis Team. (2019). United States Border Patrol Southwest 

Border Apprehensions of Family Unit Subjects and UAC FY2014 to FY2019.

CRCL. (2011). Recommendations on Complaint No. 10-01-DHS-0015.

CRCL. (2012). Complaints Involving 14 Unaccompanied Alien Children and U.S. Border Patrol. 

CRCL. (2012). Policy Recommendation CRCL Complaint No. 09-01-ICE-0115.

CRCL. (2012). Policy Recommendations Complaint No. 11-06-CBP-0913. 

CRCL. (2013). Recommendations related to Complaint No. 12-04-ICE-0064.

CRCL. (2014) Rio Grande Valley Sector Stations Onsite Investigations: Preliminary Findings and 

Recommendations.

CRCL. (2017). Rio Grande Valley Sector Complaints: Brownsville, Falfurrias, Harlingen, 

Kingsville, McAllen, Rio Grande City, and Weslaco.

CRCL. (2018). Analysis and Recommendations for Multiple Complaints.

CRCL. (2018). Provision of Meals to Unaccompanied Minors at Yuma Border Patrol Station. 

Credible Fear, Reasonable Fear, and Affirmative Asylum Receipts and Pending Affirmative

Asylum Caseload – All Asylum Offices. (2019).
31

Department of Homeland Security. (2018). HSAC Cover Letter.

Department of Homeland Security. (2019). Secretary Nielsen Orders CBP to Surge More 

Personnel to Southern Border, Increase Number of Aliens Returned to Mexico. 

https://www.dhs.gov/news/2019/04/01/secretary-nielsen-orders-cbp-surge-more-personnelsouthern-border-increase-number

Department of Homeland Security. (2019). Migration Protection Protocols. 

https://www.dhs.gov/news/2019/01/24/migrant-protection-protocols

Department of Homeland Security. (2019). U.S. Department of Homeland Security Homeland 

Security Advisory Council Public Teleconference Call. 

https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/February%2028%2C%202019%2C%2

0Executive%20Summary%20Final.pdf

Department of Justice. (2019). Executive Office for Immigration Review Adjudication Statistics.

Asylum Decision Rates.

Department of Justice. (2019). Executive Office for Immigration Review Adjudication Statistics.

Credible Fear and Asylum Process: Fiscal Year (FY) 2018.

Devereaux, R. & Speri, A. (2018). The Trump Administration Carried Out Thousands More 

Family Separations Than Previously Acknowledged.

EOIR. (2018). Referral Process Flow Chart. https://www.govexec.com/feature/inside-conveyorbelt-behind-curtain-dojs-immigration-courts/

GAO. (2014). Alternatives to Detention: Improved Data Collection and Analyses Needed to Better 

Assess Program Effectiveness.

GAO. (2015). Draft: National Standard for Offender Tracking Systems Addresses Common 

Stakeholder Needs.

GEO Care. (2017). Family Case Management Program.

GPO. (2008). William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008. 

Health and Human Services Office of the Inspector General. (January 2019). Separated Children

Placed in Office of Refugee Resettlement Care.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement. (2018). Family Unit (FAMU) Apprehension Process. 

Immigration and Customs Enforcement. (2019). ICE Detention Facilities.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement/ Customs and Border Protection. (n.d.) Definitions for 

what constitutes a Family Member Unit Alien (FMUA), Unaccompanied Alien Child 

(UAC), Accompanied Minor (AM), and Single Adult (SA).

Jenny L. Flores, et al. v. Jefferson B. Sessions, III, et al. , CV 85-4544 DMG (AGRx) (United 

States District Court June 27, 2017).

Jenny Lisette Flores, et al v. Janet Reno, Attorney General of the United States, et al, CV 85-4544-

RJK(Px) (United States District Court).

Kight, S. W., Owens, C., Stevens, H. (2019) Thousands of Migrant Youth Allegedly Suffered 

Sexual Abuse in U.S. Custody. https://www.axios.com/immigration-unaccompaniedminors-sexual-assault-3222e230-29e1-430f-a361-

d959c88c5d8c.html?fbclid=IwAR0R9GXIg7WgVKGQwUmTMMUoB7zvUMdLtIHgaiFI

9YXdqtORLVtTSqPMnzE

McAleenan, K. (2018). Letter from CBP Commissioner to Senator Feinstein on the death of 

Jakelin Caal Maquin.

McPherson, P. (2015). Mental Health Expert’s Report on South Texas Family Residential Center. 

McPherson, P. (2016). Mental Health Expert’s Report: Karnes County Residential Center

Investigation.

McPherson, P. (2016). Mental Health Expert’s Report: South Texas Family Residential Center.
32

McPherson, P. (2017). Mental Health Expert’s Report: Karnes County Residential Center 

Investigation IV.

McPherson, P. (2017). Mental Health Expert’s Report: South Texas Family Residential Center. 

National PREA Resource Center. (n.d.). PREA Standards in Focus.

https://www.prearesourcecenter.org/StandardsinFocus

Nielsen, K. (2019). Policy Guidance for Implementation of the Migrant Protection Protocols. 

Nielsen, K. (2019). Request for DHS Volunteers at the Southern Border.

Nielsen, K. (2019). Secretary Nielsen of the Department of Homeland Security wrote a letter to the 

members of Congress on the dire situation at the border.

Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, Dept. of Homeland Security. (2018). Fiscal Year 2017 

Annual Report to Congress.

Office of Public Affairs, Dept. Homeland Security. (2018). Myth vs. Fact: Presidential 

Proclamation & Rule on Asylum.

Office of Public Affairs, Dept. Homeland Security. (2019). Secretary Nielsen Statement on FY19 

Homeland Security Funding Bill and National Emergency Declaration.

Office of Refugee Resettlement. (2015). ORR Guide: Children Entering the United States 

Unaccompanied. https://www.acf.hhs.gov/orr/resource/children-entering-the-united-statesunaccompanied

OFO Field Readiness Division, Admissibility and Passenger Programs, and the Mitigation Crisis 

Action Team. (2018). HSAC CBP Families and Children Care Panel. Executive Summary.

Rodriguez, J. E. (2018). Letter from the CoS of the Under Secretary for North America to Mr. John 

Creamer at the Embassy of the US.

Skipworth, D. (2015). Report for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Office for Civil 

Rights and Civil Liberties: Karnes County Residential Facility, Karnes City, Texas.

Skipworth, D. (2015). Report for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Office for Civil 

Rights and Civil Liberties: Karnes County Residential Facility, Karnes City, Texas –

Karnes II.

Skipworth, D. (2015). Report for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Office for Civil 

Rights and Civil Liberties: South Texas Family Residential Facility, Dilley, Texas.

Skipworth, D. (2016). Report for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Office for Civil 

Rights and Civil Liberties: Karnes County Residential Facility, Karnes City, Texas –

Karnes III.

Skipworth, D. (2016). Report for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Office for Civil 

Rights and Civil Liberties: South Texas Family Residential Facility, Dilley, Texas.

Skipworth, D. (2017). Report for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Office for Civil 

Rights and Civil Liberties: Karnes County Residential Facility, Karnes City, Texas –

Karnes IV.

Skipworth, D. (2017). Report for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Office of Civil Rights 

and Civil Liberties: South Texas Family Residential Center, Dilley, Texas.

Still, W. (2015). Corrections Expert’s Report on Karnes County Residential Center. 

Still, W. (2015). Corrections Expert’s Report on Karnes County Residential Center II. 

Still, W. (2015). Corrections Expert’s Report on South Texas Family Residential Center.

Still, W. (2016). Corrections Expert’s Report on Karnes County Residential Center III. 

Still, W. (2016). Corrections Expert’s Report on South Texas Family Residential Center. 

Still, W. (2017). Corrections Expert’s Report on Karnes County Residential CenterIV.

Still, W. (2017). Corrections Expert’s Report on South Texas Residential Center: “Dilley IV.” 

SWB POE. (FY18). Border Wait Times for HSAC.
33

TRAC Immigration. (2019). Newly Arriving Families Not Main Reason For Immigration Court’s 

Growing Backlog. https://trac.syr.edu/immigration/reports/551/#f1

Tuscan Field Office. (2018). Operational Challenges regarding: processing, detention, space, 

facilities, transportation of Family Units in the Tuscan Field Office.

UNHCR ACNUR. (2019). Graph: Asylum Claimants in Mexico. 

UNHCR ACNUR. (2019). Graph: Asylum Claims in Costa Rica.

UNHCR. (2018). UNCHR Proposal for Addressing Strains on the U.S. Asylum System. 

UNHCR. (2019). Expanding Operations in Central America

UNHCR. (2019). Overview of Germany’s Reception Practice for Asylum-Seekers.

UNICEF. (2019). Recommendations to U.S. Customs and Border Protection on Border Processing 

Facilities.

UNICEF. (2019). Overview of Germany’s Reception Practice for Asylum-Seekers. 

USCIS/EOIR. (2018). Collaborative Asylum/Credible Fear Processing Pilot – San Diego Field

Office.

U.S. Asylum Process for Individuals Already Present in the United States Who are not in Removal 

Proceedings. (n.d.).

U.S. Asylum Process for Individuals Arriving at Ports of Entry and Certain Illegal Entrants 

Apprehended Within 100 Air Miles of U.S. International Land Border. (n.d.).

U.S. Border Patrol. (2018). Operations: What Needs to be Done.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection. (2018). Statement by U.S. Customs and Border Protection on 

the Death of a Seven-Year-Old Female Child.

U.S. Department of Homeland Security. (2018). Migrant Protection Protocols.

U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2014). Alternatives to Detention: Improved Data 

Collection and Analyses Needed to Better Assess Program Effectiveness.

U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2015). Electronic Monitoring: Draft National Standard 

for Offender Tracking Systems Addresses Common Stakeholder Needs.

U.S. House Committee on the Judiciary. (2019) Oversight of the Trump Administration’s Family 

Separation Policy.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. (2019) ICE Detention Facilities.

William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008, 110-457 (Public 

Law 110th Congress December 23, 2008).
34

APPENDIX G – GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS

BIA – Board of Immigration Appeals 

BLM – Bureau of Land Management

CBP – U.S. Customs and Border Protection 

CIS – Citizenship and Immigration Services 

CPC – Central Processing Center

CRCL – Civil Rights and Civil Liberties 

DHS – Department of Homeland Security 

DOD – Department of Defense

DOJ – Department of Justice

EOIR – Executive Office for Immigration Review 

ERO – Enforcement and Removal Office

ESF – Emergency Support Function 

FCCP – Families and Children Care Panel

FEMA – Federal Emergency Management Agency 

FMUA – Family Units Apprehensions

FOB – Forward Operating Base

GSA – General Services Administration 

HHS – Health and Human Services

HSAC – Homeland Security Advisory Council 

ICE – Immigration and Customs Enforcement 

ICRC – International Committee of the Red Cross 

INA – Immigration and Nationality Acts

MPP – Migrant Protection Protocols

NAFPI – North American Family Protection Initiative 

NGO – Non-Governmental Organization

NRF – National Response Framework 

NT – Northern Triangle

NTA – Notice to Appear

OFO – Office of Field Operations

OMB – Office of Management and Budget 

ORR – Office of Refugee Resettlement 

PAIC – Patrol Agent in Charge

POE – Port of Entry

RPC – Regional Processing Center 

SBO – Southwest Border Operations 

SWB – Southwest Border

TDY – Temporary Duty

TVPRA – Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act 

UAC – Unaccompanied Children

UNHCR – UN High Commissioner for Human Rights 

UNICEF – UN International Children’s Emergency Fund 

USBP – U.S. Border Patrol

USG – United States Government