DHS Training Needs for 

Hiring 15,000 Border Patrol 

Agents and Immigration 

Officers 

November 26, 2018 

OIG-19-07 
 

 

 

 

 

 

DHS OIG HIGHLIGHTS
 

DHS Training Needs for Hiring 15,000

Border Patrol Agents and Immigration Officers 

November 26, 2018 

Why We Did 

This Audit 

On January 25, 2017, 

the President issued two 

Executive Orders 

directing the 

Department of 

Homeland Security to 

hire an additional 

15,000 law enforcement 

officers. We conducted 

this audit to determine 

whether the Department 

and its components — 

specifically FLETC, 

USBP, and ICE — have 

the training strategies 

and capabilities in place 

to train 15,000 new 

agents and officers. 

What We 

Recommend 

We made three 

recommendations to 

improve training and 

coordination within the 

Department. 

For Further Information: 

Contact our Office of Public Affairs 

at (202) 981-6000, or email us at 

DHS-OIG.OfficePublicAffairs@oig.dhs.gov 

What We Found 

The Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers 

(FLETC), U.S. Border Patrol (USBP), and U.S. 

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) have each 

developed hiring surge training plans and strategies. 

However, we found challenges exist due to uncertain 

funding commitments and overextended throughput 

capacity, particularly as they affect training resource 

projections and expansion capabilities to meet hiring 

goals. We also identified crosscutting concerns with 

current training conditions that will likely become more 

serious with increased demand. 

Additionally, FLETC, USBP, and ICE each apply a 

different approach to managing and implementing their 

instructor programs. This impacts the effectiveness and 

cost of instructors, as well as the application of best 

practices. Furthermore, in the absence of any instructor 

rotation policy, ICE Homeland Security Investigations 

relies heavily on temporary duty instructors with 

abbreviated assignments. This approach is not only 

expensive but also ineffective in terms of ensuring 

consistent, safe instruction. 

If these combined challenges and conditions continue, 

they may impede consistency and lead to a degradation 

in training and standards. As a result, trainees will be 

less prepared for their assigned field environment, 

potentially impeding mission achievability and 

increasing safety risk to themselves, other law 

enforcement officers, and anyone within their 

enforcement authority. Coordination among FLETC, 

USBP, and ICE is critical to the effective expansion of 

capabilities for law enforcement training that meets the 

Executive Orders’ requirements, but at the same time 

works within the limits of the funds granted. 

DHS Response 

The Department concurred with the three 

recommendations. 

www.oig.dhs.gov OIG-19-07 
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Washington, DC 20528 / www.oig.dhs.gov 

November 26, 2018 

MEMORANDUM FOR: The Honorable Claire M. Grady 

Acting Deputy Secretary 

The Honorable Thomas J. Walters 

Director 

Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers 

FROM: John V. Kelly 

Senior Official Performing the Duties of the Inspector 

General 

SUBJECT:	 DHS Training Needs for Hiring 15,000 Border Patrol 

Agents and Immigration Officers 

Attached for your action is our final report, DHS Training Needs for Hiring 

15,000 Border Patrol Agents and Immigration Officers. We incorporated the 

formal comments from the Department in the final report. 

The report contains three recommendations aimed at improving Federal law 

enforcement officer training. Your office concurred with the three 

recommendations. Based on information provided in your response to the draft 

report, we consider the recommendations open and resolved. Once your office 

has fully implemented the recommendations, please submit a formal closeout 

letter to us within 30 days so that we may close the recommendations. The 

memorandum should be accompanied by evidence of completion of 

agreed-upon corrective actions. 

Please send your response or closure request to 

OIGAuditsFollowup@oig.dhs.gov. 

Consistent with our responsibility under the Inspector General Act, we will 

provide copies of our report to congressional committees with oversight and 

appropriation responsibility over the Department of Homeland Security. We will 

post the report on our website for public dissemination. 

Please call me with any questions, or your staff may contact Sondra McCauley, 

Assistant Inspector General for Audits, at (202) 981-6000. 
 

 

 

 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Table of Contents 

Background .................................................................................................... 1 

Results of Audit .............................................................................................. 4 

Uncertain Funding Limits Implementation of Plans and Strategies......... 5 

Existing Training Venues Need Improvement ......................................... 6 

Competition for Preferred Training Venues ............................................. 8 

Housing Challenges at FLETC in Glynco, GA ....................................... 10 

Instructor Programs and Policies Need Improvement............................ 11 

Recommendations......................................................................................... 13 

Appendixes 

Appendix A: Objective, Scope, and Methodology ................................. 17 

Appendix B: DHS Management Comments to the Draft Report ............ 19 

Appendix C: USBP and ICE Hiring Projections, Anticipated Attrition, and 

Recruitment Efforts ......................................................... 25 

Appendix D: Office of Audits Major Contributors to This Report ........... 28 

Appendix E:Report Distribution .......................................................... 29 

Abbreviations 

CBP Customs and Border Protection 

EO Executive Orders 

ERO Enforcement and Removal Operations 

FLETC Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers 

GAO Government Accountability Office 

HSI Homeland Security Investigations 

ICE Immigration and Customs Enforcement 

USBP United States Border Patrol 

www.oig.dhs.gov OIG-19-07 
                                                      

 

 

 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Background 

On January 25, 2017, the President issued two Executive Orders (EO)1 

directing the Department of Homeland Security to hire an additional 5,000 

Border Patrol Agents and 10,000 Immigration Officers. On February 20, 2017, 

the DHS Secretary issued implementing memorandums in support of the EOs, 

directing U.S. Border Patrol (USBP) and U.S. Immigration and Customs 

Enforcement (ICE) to ensure consistency in training and standards while 

taking action immediately to begin the hiring surge. 

As set forth in Special Report: Challenges Facing DHS in Its Attempt to Hire 

15,000 Border Patrol Agents and Immigration Officers, OIG-17-98-SR 

(July 27, 2017), proper workforce planning is critical to ensure correct staffing 

levels, ratios, and placements; and to guide targeted recruitment campaigns. 

USBP’s hiring plan runs from fiscal years 2019–25. During this period, USBP 

plans to hire 1,050 agents per year, which incorporates a 15 percent2 training 

academy attrition rate. However, this projection does not take into account the 

4.6 percent staff attrition rate U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 

reported in FY 2017 or its authorized staffing level shortages for Border Patrol 

Agents. ICE provided several hiring plans, including a 4-year span for FYs 

2018–21, in which they planned to hire 8,500 Enforcement and Removal 

Operations (ERO) officers and 1,500 Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) 

agents. ICE did not incorporate staff or academy attrition in its hiring 

projections. For FY 2017, ICE reported a staff attrition rate of approximately 4 

percent for both ERO and HSI, and an academy attrition rate of 12.2 and 5.9 

percent for ERO and HSI, respectively. ICE officials last reported in January 

2018 that they are still in the process of revising the timeframe in which they 

will “onboard” 10,000 new law enforcement officers (appendix C contains USBP 

and ICE hiring projections, anticipated attrition, and recruitment efforts).3 

Between July 2017 and March 2018, we reviewed and analyzed the EOs, DHS’s 

implementation memorandums concerning the EOs, and respective agency 

hiring plans and training strategies. We also interviewed agency personnel and 

training staff at the Federal Bureau of Investigation and U.S. Marshals Service, 

as well as visited DHS training sites. The purpose of this review was to 

determine whether DHS, through FLETC, USBP, and ICE, developed training 

1 Executive Order 13767- Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements, January 

25, 2017; and Executive Order 13768- Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United 

States, January 25, 2017.
 2 This attrition rate takes into account training injuries and trainees given a second chance to 

graduate from the training program.
 3 USBP and ICE’s hiring projections are subject to change based on fluctuations in demand, 

attrition, and available funding.
 

www.oig.dhs.gov 1 OIG-19-07 
                                                      

 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

strategies and identified resources necessary to train 15,000 new agents and 

officers.4 

USBP and ICE trainees attend basic training at each component’s academy 

within the Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers (FLETC). This 

necessitates close coordination among FLETC, USBP, and ICE to ensure the 

availability of instructors, training venues and housing, and other important 

resources. Each component performs different but complementary training 

duties and responsibilities. 

FLETC provides basic, advanced, specialized, and in-service requalification 

training for personnel from more than 90 Federal law enforcement agencies5 as 

well as state, local, tribal, and international law enforcement agencies. 

According to FLETC’s “surge implementation plan,” FLETC is anticipating an 

increase in training demand over the next 5 years because of the Department 

hiring surge, as well as other Partner Organizations’ increase in hiring over the 

next few years. The training covers areas that include use of force, active threat 

response, defensive tactics, firearms, terrorism, first response, interviewing and 

investigations, and constitutional law; each of which requires availability of a 

specific set of resources. FLETC owns and operates three residential centers in 

the United States (Artesia, NM; Charleston, SC; and Glynco, GA), and one nonresidential center (Cheltenham, MD). 

FLETC and its Partner Organizations 

(including USBP and ICE) use 

Memorandums of Understanding to outline 

training agreements, protocols, and 

procedures related to staffing and use of 

facilities. For example, FLETC and its 

Partner Organizations typically split 

training instructor costs and requirements, 

also known as the FLETC “pro-rata” share. 

Agencies provide a “pro-rata” share for all 

of their requested training in a given year 

with the following options: 

FLETC 

Mission: 

FLETC, through strategic 

partnerships, prepares the Federal law 

enforcement community to safeguard 

the American people, our homeland, 

and our values. 

Vision: 

FLETC is America’s enterprise 

resource for Federal law enforcement 

training. 

4 The audit scope was limited to basic training for newly hired DHS agents and officers. We 

recognize that DHS agents and officers receive continual on-the-job, advanced, and leadership 

training throughout their career. This report does not address the potential challenges DHS 

may face related to providing these types of trainings to their workforce while at the same time 

conducting basic training for new hires. 

5 There are currently 13 Partner Organizations within DHS, such as ICE, USBP, U.S. Secret 

Service, Transportation Security Administration, and Federal Protective Service. 

www.oig.dhs.gov 2 OIG-19-07 
 

                                                      

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

1. assign instructors to FLETC (ideally for a period of 3 to 5 years); 

2. provide funding to FLETC to hire instructors on the agency’s behalf (the 

FY 2018 rate is $112,000 per instructor for salary and benefits); or 

3. implement a combination of options 1 and 2. 

Student costs for training at FLETC include tuition, meals, lodging, instructors, 

and miscellaneous expenses. 

USBP is the mobile, uniformed law 

enforcement arm of CBP responsible for 

securing U.S. borders between ports of 

entry. CBP’s Office of Training and 

Development oversees and operates 

training at the Border Patrol Academy. 

Border Patrol Agent trainees attend a 

117-day USBP integrated basic training program, located at FLETC in Artesia, 

NM, that USBP and FLETC instructors administer and operate. Prior to 

issuance of the 2017 EOs, USBP spent 3 years (2013–16) revising its training 

program and has no planned modifications to address the hiring surge. In FY 

2017, 262 students graduated from USBP’s training program, and FLETC 

projects 648 to graduate in FY 2018. 

USBP Academy Mission: 

The Border Patrol Academy will 

develop, hone, and institutionalize 

protocols, concepts, and systems to 

improve training, develop professional 

instructors, and reinforce 

relationships with internal and 

external stakeholders. 

ICE, through its ERO directorate, identifies and apprehends removable aliens; 

detains individuals when necessary; and removes illegal aliens from the United 

States. ERO’s Basic Immigration Enforcement Training Program, conducted at 

FLETC in Glynco, GA, spans 20 weeks and includes Spanish language training 

that ERO and FLETC instructors administer and operate. In FY 2017, 134 

students graduated from ICE ERO’s training program, and FLETC projects 195 

to graduate in FY 2018. 

ICE’s HSI directorate is responsible for investigating a wide range of domestic 

and international activities arising from the illegal movement of people and 

goods into, within, and out of the United States. HSI’s Basic Training Academy 

is a two-phase program located at FLETC in Glynco, GA. The first phase is a 

56-day Criminal Investigator Training Program that FLETC instructors 

administer and operate.6 The second phase is a 75-day HSI Special Agent 

Training Program that HSI and FLETC instructors administer and operate. In 

FY 2017, 186 students graduated from ICE HSI’s training programs, and 

FLETC projects 386 to graduate in FY 2018. 

6 FLETC instructors administering and operating the Criminal Investigator Training Program 

are instructors employed by FLETC as well as criminal investigators and officers detailed to 

FLETC by Partner Organizations. 

www.oig.dhs.gov 3 OIG-19-07 
 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

ICE is in the process of restructuring its 

training program as outlined in 

Management Alert — ICE's Training Model 

Needs Further Evaluation (OIG-18-42, 

January 2018), and will return to separate 

training programs led by ERO and HSI, 

respectively, rather than a centralized 

approach. To accommodate the anticipated 

increase of trainees, ERO and HSI are 

preparing to deliver training in two working shifts, along with 6-day 

workweeks. Furthermore, ICE is working with FLETC to review its training 

programs and identify efficiencies in order to reduce the length of time required 

for training, where possible, without diminishing value. 

ICE Training Academy Mission: 

The mission of the ICE Academy at Glynco is to 

develop and deliver professional training 

programs in order to provide ICE employees with 

the knowledge, skills, and abilities essential to 

ICE's national security and law enforcement 

mission. 

Results of Audit 

FLETC, USBP, and ICE have each developed hiring surge training plans and 

strategies. However, the hiring surge has not begun and FLETC’s throughput 

capacity is already overextended. In fact, we found challenges exist due to 

uncertain funding commitments, particularly as they affect training resource 

projections and expansion capabilities to meet hiring goals. We also identified 

crosscutting concerns with current training conditions that will likely become 

more serious with increased demand. As the Department prepares to hire and 

train 15,000 law enforcement officers, it is already struggling to: 

 improve training venues and workaround scenarios to avoid degradation 

of training at FLETC in Artesia, NM; and 

 ensure the availability of preferred training venues and housing at 

FLETC in Glynco, GA. 

Additionally, FLETC, USBP, and ICE each apply a different approach to 

managing and implementing their instructor programs. This influences the 

effectiveness and cost of instructors, as well as the application of best 

practices. Furthermore, in the absence of any instructor rotation policy, HSI 

relies heavily on temporary duty instructors with abbreviated assignments. 

This approach is not only expensive but also ineffective in terms of ensuring 

consistent, safe instruction. 

If these combined challenges and conditions continue, they may impede 

consistency and lead to a degradation in training and standards. As a result, 

trainees will be less prepared for their assigned field environments, potentially 

impeding mission achievability and increasing safety risk to themselves, other 

law enforcement officers, and anyone within their enforcement authority. 

Coordination among FLETC, USBP, and ICE is critical to the effective 

www.oig.dhs.gov 4 OIG-19-07 
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

expansion of capabilities for law enforcement training that meets the EOs’ 

requirements but, at the same time, has to work within the limits of the funds 

granted. 

Uncertain Funding Limits Implementation of Plans and Strategies 

Following issuance of the EOs in January 2017, FLETC, USBP, and ICE 

developed training plans and strategies and assessed their capability to meet 

hiring surge projections. In doing so, each component projected resource 

requirements such as the number and associated cost of instructors, support 

staff, and training venues and facilities. Plans and strategies also considered: 

 use of alternate locations, 

 efficiencies related to scheduling and curriculum, and 

 optimal class size. 

FLETC, USBP, and ICE developed plans and strategies to maximize resources. 

However, the uncertainty related to funding limits their implementation. As a 

result, the Department pushed FY 2017 and 2018 hiring and training 

projections to FY 2019 and beyond. 

Funding limitations will delay efforts to improve and construct necessary 

training venues and facilities. For example, Congress did not approve the 

Department’s FY 2017 request of $63 million for FLETC venues and facilities to 

support USBP and ICE law enforcement officer training. Consequently, FLETC 

requested $101.8 million in funding for training venues and facilities for 

FY 2019. According to the funding justification, this request includes modular 

classrooms, offices, dormitories, skid ranges, a transportation checkpoint, a 

processing center, a non-lethal training ammunition shoot house, a tactical 

training awareness center, and tactical training venues. Even if FLETC receives 

the requested funding in FY 2019, there are still significant lead times 

associated with the facilities that the components will have to consider. 

According to a FLETC official, it will take approximately 11 months to build the 

modular dormitories, consisting of approximately 4 months for design and 

7 months for construction. That projected timeframe can be impacted by 

numerous factors such as weather, market conditions (e.g., supply/demand of 

available labor, materials, etc.), and the acquisition strategy to be used for the 

construction project. 

Delays in funding will also have a domino effect on the respective component’s 

ability to obtain timely resources and extend overall lead times for instructor 

availability. Increased student throughput will further exacerbate existing 

instructor availability challenges. HSI instructors indicated there are instances 

in which they do not have the required number of instructors for a course, 

www.oig.dhs.gov 5 OIG-19-07 
 

                                                      

 

 - 

 

 

 

 

 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

forcing instructors to break the training apart into groups. For example, HSI 

instructors stated that they might split the HSI Defensive Tactics class of 24 

students into two groups. Due to the limited number of available instructors, 

and to ensure safety, only half the class will train at a time, reducing their 

training time. 

Existing Training Venues Need Improvement 

USBP faces challenges with training venues as they exist at FLETC in 

Artesia, NM. According to USBP officials, USBP revised its training curriculum 

based on current research. In doing so, USBP identified areas to enhance 

training and emphasize performance-based scenarios. USBP also 

conceptualized improved training venues to align with its revamped 

curriculum. However, because of lack of funding, CBP has not been able to 

construct most of the required venues to incorporate curriculum revisions. As a 

result, USBP Academy instructors stated that they conduct training using 

“workarounds” that lack performance-based realistic settings.7 

USBP officials could benefit from new or improved, modern training venues, 

such as the proposed transportation terminal/checkpoint and the VIRTRA 300 

judgmental use of force simulator. To date, CBP officials indicated funding has 

not been provided to support the majority of needed training venue 

improvements. Without necessary improvements, the quality of instruction will 

remain below intended levels and 

not include exposure to authentic 

environments. As a result, trainees 

will be less prepared for their 

assigned field environments, 

potentially impacting detection of 

people or items prohibited by law 

and increasing safety risk to 

themselves, other law enforcement 

officers, and anyone within their 

enforcement authority. 

Ideal Venues versus Current Workarounds 

“The workarounds were intended as a short term 

fix, and not meant to be a permanent part of the 

training program. The intent was to make the 

training as realistic as possible, and to give 

students an experience that closely resembles 

what they will see in the field. The workarounds 

currently in place will give the trainee an idea of 

what they can expect, but do not come close to 

the vision of what was to be a gold standard for 

law enforcement training.” – USBP Senior 

Academy Official 

USBP academy officials identified potential areas in which degradation of 

training could occur due to the current inadequate training venues. The 

following section compares two of eight venues in ideal-versus-workaround 

form. 

7 During interviews, USBP instructors referred to substitute scenarios as “workarounds.” We 

use the term “workarounds” in our report to denote situations in which instructors are using 

training equipment that does not replicate the current environments in which agents work. 

www.oig.dhs.gov 6 OIG-19-07 
 

 

 

 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

The Proposed Transportation Terminal/Checkpoint — In designing the 

checkpoint training, USBP academy officials conceptualized using a modern 

terminal environment. As outlined in USBP’s training venue improvement 

presentation, potential benefits of the proposed transportation 

terminal/checkpoint include: 

 settings that provide reality-based training associated with the use of 

coach-style buses and terminals; 

 checkpoint facilities that include secondary inspection lanes for buses 

and other large conveyances; and 

 areas for processing, inspection, and arrest scenarios. 

During this audit, USBP used yellow school buses that required trainees to 

pretend to search imaginary storage compartments and bathrooms. This 

significantly detracted from the potential training value of using fully equipped 

coach-style buses. USBP purchased and received two coach-style buses that 

we observed sitting in a vacant lot at FLETC in Artesia, NM, in August 2017. As 

of March 2018, a USBP academy official indicated there is a FLETC purchase 

requisition for the installation of heating and air conditioning units and 

relocation of the buses. Because the requisition had yet to be funded, the 

buses remained in the lot, unused for training purposes. 

Without a modern terminal environment, trainees must rely on workarounds to 

substitute for the proposed transportation terminal/checkpoint, preventing 

exposure to real-life training scenarios. As a result, trainees will be less 

prepared for duties associated with transportation terminals, potentially 

impacting safety risk and detection of illegal activity. 

 Figure 1. Proposed Terminal/Checkpoint Figure 2. Current Training Environment 

Source: USBP Academy Source: USBP Academy 

The Proposed VIRTRA 300 Judgmental Use of Force Simulator — This venue 

would provide a multi-dimensional presentation of threats. It was redesigned 

after USBP agents in the field reported a need for improved preparation for 

their work environment. As outlined in USBP’s training venue improvement 

www.oig.dhs.gov 7 OIG-19-07 
 

 

 

 

 

                                                       

 

 

 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

presentation, potential benefits of the proposed VIRTRA 300 Judgmental Use of 

Force Simulation include: 

	 enhanced 300-degree training, providing real-world scenarios from 

almost any direction — thereby increasing critical thinking and judgment 

in use of force scenarios; 

 programmable scenarios to address targeted problem areas; and 

 use of photos from actual patrol areas. 

Without this venue and equipment, 

trainees must rely on a onedimensional training scenario, which 

does not expose trainees to enhanced 

risk mitigation techniques, critical 

thinking skills, and total situational 

awareness during use of force 

exercises. As a result of using the 

existing firearms simulator, trainees will be less prepared for real-world 

situations, potentially increasing safety risk based on judgment determinations 

for use of force. 

“The VIRTRA is already in use in the field for 

USBP personnel to complete quarterly & semiannual training. The system at the Border Patrol 

Academy is not only outdated but also is a 

system no longer used anywhere else within 

CBP.” – CBP Office of Training and Development 

Official 

 Figure 3. Proposed VIRTRA 300 Simulator Figure 4. Current Training Environment 

Source: USBP Academy Source: USBP Academy 

Competition for Preferred Training Venues 

USBP and ICE may not always have access to preferred training venues8 at 

FLETC because of high competition with other Partner Organizations. 

Increased training demands, coupled with insufficient funding to construct new 

venues, will lead to scheduling challenges and impact the availability of 

preferred training venues. Prior to the receipt of funding and start of the hiring 

8 A preferred training venue provides more realistic scenarios in urban and residential settings, 

including multi-floor, multi-room designs. 

www.oig.dhs.gov 8 OIG-19-07 
 

 

 

 

 

                                                       

 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

surge, training venue capacity at FLETC is already overextended. For example, 

FLETC officials identified eight training venues and facilities that have already 

exceeded or will continue to exceed capacity. FLETC noted these venues as 

having a “need for investment” in order to meet increased training demands. If 

funded, the hiring surge will stretch FLETC’s training venue capacity 

limitations even further. 

As a result, a FLETC official stated that potential backup venues have been 

identified to address heightened demand. However, these venues lack 

variations in structures and features to enable realistic and effective training. 

For example, the one-level backup venue (as illustrated in figure 6) lacks 

stairwells, which precludes training on tactics for navigating such settings. 

Preferred versus Potential Backup Venue — (Glynco, GA)

 Figure 5. Preferred Venue — Danis City Figure 6. Backup Venue — Old Navy Housing 

Source: FLETC Source: DHS OIG 

Additionally, these secondary venues may not always facilitate a safe 

environment for training. For instance, as outlined in our FLETC Warehouse 

Management Alert, issued in December 2017,9 USBP’s Border Patrol Academy 

continued to use a warehouse10 for training at FLETC in Artesia, NM, even 

though the warehouse sustained structural damage that posed a potential 

safety hazard to instructors and trainees. 

9 Management Alert-Safety Issue at FLETC Artesia Warehouse (OIG-18-31, December
 

2017) 

10 After the issuance of the Management Alert, training was moved to a different FLETC
 

warehouse.
 

www.oig.dhs.gov 9 OIG-19-07 
 

                                                      

 

 

 

-

 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Housing Challenges at FLETC in Glynco, GA 

Onsite housing has not been available for all trainees in Glynco, GA, due to 

high demand and property loss from Hurricanes Matthew in 2016 and Irma in 

2017. During our review, FLETC was in the process of renovating 

approximately 123 dormitory rooms that were off-line due to hurricane 

damage.11 In FY 2017, FLETC in Glynco, GA, reported it exceeded its onsite 

lodging capacity of 22,912 students. As a result, FLETC officials reported it had 

to house students in off-center lodging, 

transporting 6,413 students up to 74 miles away 

from the center. In FY 2018, FLETC projects a 

student population of 33,803, which exceeds its 

onsite lodging capacity. FLETC projected it will 

have to house more than 11,000 students in offcenter lodging in FY 2018. FLETC primarily 

contracts with moderate-style hotels, which puts 

trainees in an unsecure environment and prevents them from having access to 

the facilities at FLETC in Glynco. Transporting trainees from FLETC to offcenter lodging also reduces access to other trainees and limits opportunities to 

build camaraderie. 

FLETC estimates that it spent an 

additional $5.6 million for off center 

housing in FY 2017 and projects that 

in FY 2018 this figure will exceed $10 

million. The final amount could 

increase based on overall demand. 

In December 2016, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) described 

Partner Organization interviews on this topic.12 One partner stated that 

housing trainees off-site increased their portion of training costs. Another 

partner suggested that housing trainees off-site may interfere with acclimation 

to agency culture. 

To address capacity limitations and other training challenges, FLETC is in the 

process of preparing its Strategic Plan for FYs 2019–22. FLETC officials began 

drafting this plan in October 2017, and anticipated its completion by 

September 2018. In December 2016, GAO reported on FLETC’s declining 

resources, noting that, “longer-term strategic planning could help FLETC 

maintain capacity to accommodate the anticipated increase in demand for law 

enforcement training in the coming years to avoid any delays for Partner 

Organizations in hiring or training the new law enforcement officers that they 

need to achieve their missions.” 

11 On February 9, 2018, Congress approved the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018, P.L. 115–123, 

providing $5,000,000 to FLETC for “Procurement, Construction, and Improvement” for 

necessary expenses related to the consequences of Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria. 

12 Declining Resources: Selected Agencies Took Steps to Minimize Effects on Mission but 

Opportunities Exist for Additional Action (GAO 17-79; December 2016) 

www.oig.dhs.gov 10 OIG-19-07 
 

 

 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Instructor Programs and Policies Need Improvement 

FLETC, USBP, ERO, and HSI each apply a different approach to managing and 

implementing their instructor programs. This impacts the effectiveness and 

cost of instructors as well as the application of best practices. Although FLETC, 

CBP, and ICE ERO have instructor rotation policies, HSI's lack of policy and 

heavy reliance on short-term, temporary instructors is both expensive and 

ineffective for ensuring consistent, safe training. During our review, we 

identified best practices that could improve overall instruction. 

Instructor Designations, Duration, and Related Inefficiencies 

To maximize instructor effectiveness and promote fiscal responsibility, FLETC, 

USBP, ERO, and HSI should determine the optimal duration of instructor 

assignments by designation (permanent, term, rotational, temporary duty, or 

temporary-intermittent/while actually employed). In doing so, components 

should take into account the amount of time it takes for an employee to 

become a qualified instructor, and how to maximize instructor performance 

(table 1 shows current instructor designations with average duration by 

component). 

Table 1. Instructor Designations with Average Duration by Component 

Instructor 

Designations FLETC USBP Academy ERO Academy HSI Academy 

Permanent 

Instructors 

Indefinite 

duration — — — 

Term Instructors 13 months– 

4 years — — — 

Rotational 

Instructors — 3–5 years* 3–5 years** 3–5 years** 

Temporary Duty 

Instructors — 

8–11 months or 

adjunct specific 

to course length 

12 months 4 months 

Temporary 

Instructors 

(intermittent/while 

actually employed) 

Not to exceed 

1 year (may 

be extended 

indefinitely in 

1-year 

increments) 

— — — 

*Currently, USBP does not assign “detailed” instructors to FLETC. Instead, USBP provides 

instructors internally to its respective training academy for 3- to 5-year rotations. 

**ERO and HSI are expected to assign “detailed” instructors (for a 3- to 5-year period) to FLETC 

as part of their Partner Organization agreements. In addition, ERO assigns instructors 

internally to its respective training academy for 3- to 5-year rotations. Alternatively, HSI does 

not have an instructor rotational policy and the duration for internal instructors assigned to its 

academy is unspecified. 

Source: OIG analysis of FLETC, CBP, and ICE data 

www.oig.dhs.gov 11 OIG-19-07 
 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

These instructor designations and durations have different implications for cost 

and actual instruction. On average, it costs almost double to assign temporary 

duty instructors for a 3- to 5-year period (given travel and per diem expenses) 

compared to relocating an instructor, as outlined in table 2. 

Table 2. Rotational and Temporary Duty Instructor Costs 

Rotational Instructors

 (3- to 5-year rotation) 

Temporary Duty Instructors

 (3- to 5-year period) 

$152,000-$197,000 $292,000-$486,000 

Source: OIG analysis of CBP and ICE data 

Based on these figures, the three components — FLETC, CBP, and ICE — 

should consider the relative return on investment associated with assigning 

instructors to FLETC. 

HSI Needs an Instructor Rotation Policy 

The HSI training academy does not have an instructor rotation policy. To fulfill 

instruction requirements, HSI relies heavily on temporary duty instructors who 

rotate through FLETC in Glynco, GA, every 4 months. In FY 2019, it projects 

needing 176 temporary duty instructors. This approach is ineffective because it 

does not ensure consistent and safe instruction, and could lead to potential 

training degradation. Component training officials generally agree it takes a 

minimum of 6–9 months for instructor qualification, although some training 

courses require less time. Additionally, it is expensive, as each 4-month 

rotation costs approximately $32,000 in travel and per diem expenses. As of 

December 2017, HSI officials indicated they had established a working group to 

prepare a rotational policy. 

Training Academy Best Practices 

During this review, we discussed training academy best practices with FLETC, 

USBP, and ICE officials, as well as officials from the Federal Bureau of 

Investigation and the U.S. Marshals Service. This resulted in identifying the 

following best practices: 

 Offering incentives to become an instructor, such as promotion to a 

higher grade level when entering the program, relocation incentives, 

developmental opportunities, and spousal transfer priority; 

 Leveraging subject-matter experts to enhance training modules; and 

 Requiring instructors to perform short-term field missions to maintain 

proficiency and perspectives relevant to current events. 

www.oig.dhs.gov 12 OIG-19-07 
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Increased use of these practices may help FLETC, USBP, and ICE secure and 

retain qualified instructors, and lead to improved training. Adoption of these 

practices more broadly by DHS components using FLETC would further 

standardize law enforcement training and promote unity of effort. 

Conclusion 

Prior to the start of the hiring surge, FLETC’s capacity is already overextended. 

FLETC is not only responsible for accommodating the anticipated Department 

hiring surge, but also for an expected increase in demand from other Partner 

Organizations. Despite observing ongoing work in the development of hiring 

surge training plans and strategies, challenges exist due to uncertain funding 

commitments and current training conditions. Absent remedial action, these 

challenges may impede consistency and lead to a degradation in training and 

standards. As a result, trainees will be less prepared for their assigned field 

environment, potentially impeding mission achievability and increasing safety 

risk to themselves, other law enforcement officers, and anyone within their 

enforcement authority. With the Secretary’s emphasis on retaining the quality 

of training during the planned hiring surge, it is imperative for the Department 

to address these concerns. FLETC, USBP, and ICE should improve training and 

coordination within the Department, which is critical to the effective expansion 

of capabilities for law enforcement training that meets the EOs’ requirements, 

but at the same time has to work within the limits of the funds granted. 

Recommendations 

Recommendation 1: We recommend the Undersecretary of Management, in 

collaboration with FLETC, USBP, and ICE, develop and implement a 

comprehensive plan to: 

 identify, prioritize, and complete training venue and facility 

improvements; and 

 identify a strategy to address housing needs in the most cost-efficient 

manner. 

Recommendation 2: We recommend the Undersecretary of Management 

collaborate with officials from across the Department — including, but not 

limited to, the Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer, FLETC, USBP, and 

ICE — to develop and implement standards and procedures to address: 

	 optimal designations (permanent, term, rotational, temporary duty, or 

temporary-intermittent/while actually employed) and duration for 

instructors assigned to FLETC and component training academies to 

maximize efficiency and effectiveness; 

www.oig.dhs.gov 13	 OIG-19-07 
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

 HSI’s need for an established rotation policy; and 

 best practices for securing and retaining qualified instructors while 

ensuring consistent training. 

Recommendation 3: We recommend the Director of FLETC convene training 

officials from USBP, ICE, and other appropriate Partner Organizations 

department-wide to inform and assist FLETC in its efforts to finalize a Strategic 

Plan for FYs 2019–22. The group should coordinate to ensure FLETC can 

accommodate increases in demand and to minimize disruption to law 

enforcement agency hiring and training plans. 

Management Comments and OIG Analysis 

The Department concurred with our three recommendations. We included a 

copy of the Department’s management comments in their entirety in appendix 

B. We also received technical comments to the draft report and revised the 

report as appropriate. In the technical comments, the Department provided 

updates to ICE’s hiring projections and FLETC’s funding requests. We did not 

include the new information in the final report because these figures were 

dated after the scope of our fieldwork period. These revised figures would have 

been used for informational purposes only and did not affect the report’s 

findings or recommendations. We consider the three recommendations resolved 

and open until the Department implements the proposed corrective actions. A 

summary of the Department’s response and our analysis follows. 

DHS Response to Recommendation #1: Concur. The Department designated 

FLETC’s Mission and Readiness Support Directorate to take the lead on 

implementing this recommendation. Training venue and facility needs and 

improvement plans have been proposed and submitted through DHS 

Headquarters for Procurement, Construction, and Improvements funding in 

FY 2019. FLETC will continue to work with CBP, ICE, and its Partner 

Organizations to develop training needs for the upcoming 5-year period. FLETC 

identified short-, mid-, and long-term strategies and accomplishments to 

address lodging needs in a cost-efficient manner. FLETC developed a 

comprehensive plan to address this recommendation. 

OIG Analysis: We consider these actions responsive to the recommendation, 

which is resolved and open. We will close this recommendation after we review 

the Department’s request for FY 2019 funding for training facilities, 

documentation demonstrating implementation of lodging strategies, and 

processes for formal collaboration with Partner Organizations related to 

training needs. 

www.oig.dhs.gov 14 OIG-19-07 
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

DHS Response to Recommendation #2: Concur. The Office of Chief Human 

Capital Officer will work with components to develop and implement standards 

to identify the most effective instructor cadre composition for Federal law 

enforcement training. Additionally, ICE HSI drafted its 2018 HSI Academy, 

Criminal Investigator, GS1811-Rotation Program to address instructor and 

management staffing at the ICE HSI Academy. The policy is in the final 

deliberative review process within ICE. Finally, the Office of Chief Human 

Capital Officer agrees they should implement processes for securing and 

retaining qualified instructors while ensuring consistent training. The Office of 

Chief Human Capital Officer is working with FLETC to identify best practices 

for implementation. The overall estimated completion date is September 30, 

2019. 

OIG Analysis: We consider these actions responsive to the recommendation, 

which is resolved and open. We will close this recommendation after we verify 

the Department has implemented: 

 standards for effective instructor cadre composition; 

 a process for securing and retaining qualified instructors to ensure 

consistent training; and 

 the 2018 HSI Academy, Criminal Investigator, GS1811-Rotation Program. 

DHS Response to Recommendation #3: Concur. The Department approved 

FLETC to revise its mission, vision, and value statements, as well as re-align its 

organizational structure to intentionally place its Partner Organizations and 

their needs at the epicenter of FLETC’s focus. 

As a means to inform and refine FLETC’s strategic vision, the FLETC Director 

 hosted Partner Organization Training Executive Forums to discuss key 

training topic areas; 

 conducted “Listening Tours” to hear the insights and concerns of FLETC 

Partner Organization representatives and FLETC staff members; and 

	 has begun monthly meetings with FLETC Partner Organization 

representatives to discuss strategic, operational, and resource issues, 

and to ensure ongoing collaboration in developing short-, mid-, and longterm plans to address their training needs. 

The FLETC Director is nearing completion of FLETC’s strategic goals for 

2019-22, which are grounded in the insights and feedback received from 

Partner Organizations. The FLETC Director is also working with FLETC staff 

and Partner Organizations to develop FLETC’s strategic objectives. DHS 

requested this recommendation be resolved and closed as implemented. 

www.oig.dhs.gov 15	 OIG-19-07 
 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

OIG Analysis: OIG recognizes that FLETC has taken numerous actions in 

response to this recommendation. This recommendation is resolved but will 

remain open until FLETC completes its strategic plan for FYs 2019–22 and 

provides a copy of the strategic plan and the supporting documentation used 

for the approved realignment. 

www.oig.dhs.gov 16 OIG-19-07 
 

                                                      

 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Appendix A 

Objective, Scope, and Methodology 

The Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General was 

established by the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (Public Law 107−296) by 

amendment to the Inspector General Act of 1978. 

We conducted this audit to determine whether FLETC, USBP, and ICE have 

training strategies and capabilities in place to train the 15,000 new agents and 

officers they are required to hire under Executive Orders (EOs)13 13767 and 

13768. 

To answer our objectives we obtained, reviewed, and analyzed pertinent 

Federal, Department, and component documents, including: 

	 EO 13767 -Border Security and Immigration Enforcement 

Improvements and EO 13768 – Enhancing Public Safety in the 

Interior of the United States issued on January 25, 2017; 

	 The Secretary’s Memorandums, Implementing the President's 

Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements Policies 

and Enforcement of the Immigration Laws to Serve the National 

Interest issued (February 20, 2017); 

	 FLETC, USBP, and ICE training and implementation plans and 

strategies specific to hiring 15,000 new agents and officers; 

 CBP’s Hiring Contract; 

 FLETC, USBP, and ICE internal Training Directives, Recruitment 

Strategies and Plans, Standard Operating Procedures, and 

Guidance; 

 Memorandums of Understanding between FLETC, USBP, and ICE; 

and 

 DHS Congressional Budget Justifications, Prior OIG and GAO 

Reports, Media Articles, and Congressional Testimony. 

We interviewed officials from: 

	 FLETC’s Mission and Readiness Support Directorate, and Chief 

Financial Officer Directorate; Centralized Training Management 

Directorate; and Regional and International Training Directorate; 

13 Executive Order 13767- Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements, January 

25, 2017; and Executive Order 13768- Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United 

States, January 25, 2017 

www.oig.dhs.gov 17	 OIG-19-07 
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

	 CBP’s Office of Training and Development, Office of Finance, 

Mission Readiness Operations Directorate, and Advanced Training 

Center; 

	 ICE’s Office of Training and Tactical Programs, Office of the Chief 

Financial Officer, Enforcement and Removal Operations 

Directorate, Homeland Security Investigations Directorate, 

Management and Administration Directorate, Fort Benning 

Training Center, Charleston South Carolina Training Center, and 

the Dallas Texas Training Academy; 

 the Department’s Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer; 

 the U.S. Marshals Service’s Training Division; and 

 the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Training Division. 

Furthermore, we conducted site visits to observe FLETC venues and facilities in 

Glynco, GA, and Artesia, NM. 

We obtained and evaluated data provided by FLETC, USBP, and ICE on 

projected hiring numbers, student throughput, and training-related funding 

requests. We reported this information as presented to provide context, but did 

not use it to support our overall conclusions and recommendations. We also 

reviewed and validated costs for instructor relocation and temporary duty 

travel. In addition, we reviewed and evaluated FLETC housing capacity and 

off-site housing costs, but could not fully validate these figures due to 

fluctuations in schedules and demand and FLETC’s reliance on obligated 

funding rather than actual expenditures. Overall, the data included in this 

report were sufficiently reliable to support our conclusions. 

We conducted this performance audit between July 2017 and March 2018 

pursuant to the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, and according to 

generally accepted government auditing standards. Those standards require 

that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to 

provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based upon our 

audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable 

basis for our findings and conclusions based upon our audit objective. 

www.oig.dhs.gov 18	 OIG-19-07 
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Appendix B 

DHS Management Comments to the Draft Report 

www.oig.dhs.gov 19 OIG-19-07 
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

www.oig.dhs.gov 20 OIG-19-07 
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

www.oig.dhs.gov 21 OIG-19-07 
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

www.oig.dhs.gov 22 OIG-19-07 
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

www.oig.dhs.gov 23 OIG-19-07 
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

www.oig.dhs.gov 24 OIG-19-07 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                                      

 

 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Appendix C 

USBP and ICE Hiring Projections, Anticipated Attrition, and 

Recruitment Efforts 

USBP Hiring and Anticipated Attrition 

USBP’s hiring plan, under Executive Order (EO) 13767,14 spans 7 years from 

FYs 2019–25 and accounts for an academy attrition rate of approximately 

15 percent.15 During the 7-year proposal, USBP plans to hire 1,050 Border 

Patrol Agents per year, for a total of 7,350 agents. Accounting for 15 percent 

attrition, CBP projects 6,251 agents must complete academy training in order 

to fulfill the EO, as outlined in table 3. 

Table 3: CBP Projected Hiring Plan (as of January 2018) 

USBP 

Projected 

Hiring 

Training Expected FY Attrition Graduation 

2019 1,050 157 893 

2020 1,050 157 893 

2021 1,050 157 893 

2022 1,050 157 893 

2023 1,050 157 893 

2024 1,050 157 893 

2025 1,050 157 893 

Total 7,350 1,099 6,251

Source: Data provided by CBP 

In July 2017, we reported that USBP had an authorized agent staffing level of 

21,370 with 1,805 vacancies as of April 1, 2017.16 As of January 2018, USBP 

continued to lose agents, and was approximately 2,003 agents short of its 

baseline 21,370 — not including the additional 5,000 Border Patrol Agents 

mandated by the EO. 

In FY 2017, CBP reported a 4.6 percent staff attrition rate for USBP agents. 

USBP, through exit surveys, identified the number one reason agents were 

leaving the U.S. Border Patrol was due to lack of mobility and reassignment 

opportunities. In response to this issue, USBP developed the Operational 

Mobility Program, which allows USBP to provide nationwide reassignment 

opportunities to its agents while authorizing a lump sum relocation benefit to 

14 Executive Order 13767- Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements, January 

25, 2017 

15 This attrition rate takes into account training injuries and trainees given a second chance to 

graduate from the training program. 

16 Special Report: Challenges Facing DHS in Its Attempt to Hire 15,000 Border Patrol 

Agents and Immigration Officers (OIG-17-98-SR, July 2017) 

www.oig.dhs.gov 25 OIG-19-07 
 

 

                                                      

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

assist with the costs of relocating. For locations identified as difficult to retain 

employees, USBP will authorize a relocation incentive with a 1-year service 

agreement. 

USBP Recruitment Efforts 

USBP developed its 2018 Recruitment Vision, Mission, Strategy, and Goals in an 

attempt to unify all USBP sectors into one vision, and is driving recruitment 

efforts toward targeted applicant pools. Additionally, USBP established the 

National Frontline Recruitment Strategy to address immediate and long-term 

hiring objectives, and built the National Frontline Recruitment Command to 

increase organizational capability and address recruitment challenges. In 

November 2017, CBP entered into a hiring contract to hire 5,000 Border Patrol 

Agents over a 5-year period.17 

ICE Hiring and Attrition 

ICE provided several hiring plans, including a 4-year span for FYs 2018–21, in 

which ICE planned to hire 8,500 ERO officers and 1,500 HSI agents, as 

outlined in table 4. ICE officials last reported in January 2018 that they are 

still in the process of revising the timeframe in which they will “on-board” 

10,000 new law enforcement officers. 

Table 4. ICE Initial Four Year Hiring Projection (as of June 2017) 

Directorate FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 Total 

ERO 850 2,550 2,550 2,550 8,500 

HSI 150 450 450 450 1,500 

Total 1,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 10,000 

Source: Data provided by ICE 

ICE did not include staff or academy attrition in its hiring projections, as 

outlined in table 4. For 2017, ERO reported a 3.6 percent, and HSI reported a 

4.3 percent annualized staff attrition rate. In the same period, ERO reported a 

12.2 percent, and HSI reported a 5.9 percent basic academy attrition rate. 

17 CBP contracted to hire new Border Patrol Agents at a cost of approximately $40,000 per new 

agent hired. However, CBP will still perform final hiring adjudications, which will require CBP 

resources and personnel. In a January 3, 2018 letter to the Acting Commissioner of CBP, the 

Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee requested information to 

determine the reasonableness of this contractual arrangement. 

www.oig.dhs.gov 26 OIG-19-07 
 

 

                                                      

 

 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

ICE Recruitment Efforts 

In July 2017, we reported ICE considered initiating recruitment strategies, 

such as hosting “Super One Stop” (one-day) hiring events and obtaining direct 

hiring authority, both of which would expedite the hiring process.18 In January 

2018, an official from ICE’s Office of Human Capital stated it does not currently 

have a sufficient pool of candidates to fill both current vacancies and the 

positions expected to arise from EO 13768.19 

18 Special Report: Challenges Facing DHS in Its Attempt to Hire 15,000 Border Patrol 

Agents and Immigration Officers (OIG-17-98-SR, July 2017) 

19 Executive Order 13768 - Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States, January 

25, 2017 

www.oig.dhs.gov 27 OIG-19-07 
 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Appendix D 

Office of Audits Major Contributors to This Report 

Christine Haynes, Director 

Cecilia Carroll, Audit Manager 

Mike Brunelle, Auditor-In-Charge 

Tim Fonseth, Program Analyst 

John Kohler, Program Analyst 

Christine Meehan, Auditor 

Roger Thoet, Auditor 

Kevin Dolloson, Communications Analyst 

Ellen Gallagher, Communications Analyst 

Christina Sbong, Independent Referencer 

www.oig.dhs.gov 28 OIG-19-07 
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Appendix E 

Report Distribution 

Department of Homeland Security 

Secretary 

Deputy Secretary 

Chief of Staff 

General Counsel 

Executive Secretary 

Director, GAO/OIG Liaison Office 

Assistant Secretary for Office of Policy 

Assistant Secretary for Office of Public Affairs 

Assistant Secretary for Office of Legislative Affairs 

Chief, U.S. Border Patrol 

Acting Director, Immigration and Customs Enforcement 

Director, Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers 

Office of Management and Budget 

Chief, Homeland Security Branch 

DHS OIG Budget Examiner 

Congress 

Congressional Oversight and Appropriations Committees 

www.oig.dhs.gov 29 OIG-19-07 
Additional Information and Copies 

To view this and any of our other reports, please visit our website at: 

www.oig.dhs.gov. 

For further information or questions, please contact Office of Inspector General 

Public Affairs at: DHS-OIG.OfficePublicAffairs@oig.dhs.gov. 

Follow us on Twitter at: @dhsoig. 

OIG Hotline 

To report fraud, waste, or abuse, visit our website at www.oig.dhs.gov and click 

on the red "Hotline" tab. If you cannot access our website, call our hotline at 

(800) 323-8603, fax our hotline at (202) 254-4297, or write to us at: 

Department of Homeland Security 

Office of Inspector General, Mail Stop 0305 

Attention: Hotline 

245 Murray Drive, SW 

Washington, DC 20528-0305