Border Patrol Needs a 

Staffing Model to Better 

Plan for Hiring More 

Agents 

February 28, 2019 

OIG-19-23 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DHS OIG HIGHLIGHTS
 

Border Patrol Needs a Staffing Model to

Better Plan for Hiring More Agents
 

February 28, 2019 

Why We Did 

This Audit 

Within U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection (CBP), 

Border Patrol agents are 

responsible for patrolling 

our international land 

borders and coastal waters 

surrounding Florida and 

Puerto Rico. We conducted 

this audit to determine to 

what extent Border Patrol 

agents meet workload 

requirements related to 

investigative and law 

enforcement activities. 

What We 

Recommend 

We made two 

recommendations to CBP 

that, when implemented, 

should help Border Patrol 

manage its workforce in a 

more efficient and 

economical manner. 

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 

Border Patrol lacks the data and procedures needed 

to determine whether it is meeting workload 

requirements related to investigative and law 

enforcement activities. Although directed to do so 

by Congress in 2011, neither CBP nor Border Patrol 

has completed or submitted a satisfactory workforce 

staffing model as required. This occurred because 

Border Patrol has not prioritized or assigned 

adequate resources to develop and implement such 

a model to guide its hiring and operations. Without 

a complete workforce staffing model and accurate 

data, Border Patrol senior managers are unable to 

definitively determine the operational need or best 

placement for the 5,000 agents the Department of 

Homeland Security was directed to hire per a 

January 2017 Executive Order. 

Additionally, Border Patrol officials do not 

consistently schedule agents’ work duties or 

accurately document actual work hours and duties 

completed. These deficiencies occurred due to a 

lack of standard operating procedures, training, and 

oversight of the information entered into its Border 

Patrol Enforcement Tracking System. As a result, 

Border Patrol may not be deploying existing agents 

in the most efficient and economical manner. In 

fiscal year 2017, Border Patrol agents received 

approximately $55.2 million for 1.3 million hours of 

work that had no supporting documentation to 

show agents were working as needed to fulfill 

mission requirements. Good data is essential for 

Border Patrol to determine its existing and future 

operational and workload requirements accurately. 

CBP Response 

The Department concurred with the two 

recommendations. 

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

Department of Homeland Security 

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

February 28, 2019 

MEMORANDUM FOR: The Honorable Claire M. Grady 

Senior Official Performing the Duties of the 

Deputy Secretary 

FROM: John V. Kelly 

Acting Inspector General 

SUBJECT:	 Border Patrol Needs a Staffing Model to Better Plan for 

Hiring More Agents 

For your action is our final report, Border Patrol Needs a Staffing Model to 

Better Plan for Hiring More Agents. We incorporated the formal comments from 

the Department in the final report. 

The report contains two recommendations aimed at improving the Border 

Patrol’s Staffing tools. Your office concurred with the two 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 agreedupon 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. 

www.oig.dhs.gov 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Table of Contents 

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

Results of Audit .............................................................................................. 3
 

Border Patrol Has Not Completed a Workforce Staffing Model ................ 4
 

Border Patrol Enforcement Tracking System Not Consistently Updated.. 6
 

Conclusion ............................................................................................ 7
 

Recommendations........................................................................................... 7
 

Appendixes 

Appendix A: Objective, Scope, and Methodology ................................. 10
 

Appendix B: CBP Comments to the Draft Report.................................. 12
 

Appendix C: United States Border Patrol Staffing Assignments ............ 16
 

Appendix D: Office of Audits Major Contributors to This Report ........... 17
 

Appendix E: Report Distribution.......................................................... 18
 

Abbreviations 

Border Patrol United States Border Patrol
 

BPAPRA Border Patrol Agent Pay Reform Act of 2014
 

BPETS Border Patrol Enforcement Tracking System
 

CBP U.S. Customs and Border Protection
 

COSS CBP Overtime Scheduling System
 

MRD Manpower Requirements Determination
 

OIG Office of Inspector General
 

OPM Office of Personnel Management
 

RGV Rio Grande Valley
 

www.oig.dhs.gov OIG-19-23 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Background 

Law enforcement officer duties primarily include the investigation, 

apprehension, or detention of individuals suspected or convicted of offenses 

against the criminal laws of the United States. Typically, those duties are 

rigorous enough Congress determined that employment opportunities should 

be limited to young and physically vigorous individuals. Law enforcement 

officers may be transferred directly to supervisory or administrative positions 

after performing their primary duties1 for at least 3 years.2 

Within U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), United States Border Patrol 

(Border Patrol) agents are responsible for patrolling nearly 6,000 miles of 

Mexican and Canadian international land borders, and more than 2,000 miles 

of coastal waters surrounding the Florida Peninsula and the island of Puerto 

Rico. Figure 1 shows Border Patrol’s sectors of operation. 

Figure 1. U.S. Border Patrol’s Sectors of Operation 

Source: CBP 

1 For purposes of retirement, generally if an employee spends an average of at least 50 percent 

of his or her time performing a duty or group of duties, those duties are primary. 5 Code of 

Federal Regulations (CFR) § 831.902 

2 Federal Employees’ Retirement System (5 United States Code (USC) § 8401(17)) 

www.oig.dhs.gov 1 OIG-19-23 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Although Border Patrol has changed dramatically since its inception in 1924, 

its primary mission remains unchanged — to detect and prevent the illegal 

entry of aliens into the United States. Since April 2011, Congress has 

mandated that Border Patrol achieve an active duty presence of not less than 

21,370 agents to secure the U.S. borders between the ports of entry.3 However, 

as of FY 2017, attrition exceeded the Border Patrol’s ability to hire enough 

agents to meet this workforce requirement. Figure 2 shows the decline in the 

number of Border Patrol agents from October 1, 2016, through September 30, 

2017. 

Figure 2. Number of Border Patrol Agents Throughout FY 2017 

19,800 

19,700 

19,600 

19,500 

19,400 

19,300 

19,200 

19,714

19,573

19,513

19,382

19,292

OCT. 1, 2016 JAN. 1, 2017 APR. 1, 2017 JUL. 1, 2017 SEP. 30, 2017 

Border Patrol Agents 

Source: Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General (OIG) analysis of FY 

2017 Border Patrol Enforcement Tracking System data 

In January 2017, the President issued Executive Order 13767 – Border Security 

and Immigration Enforcement Improvements, directing DHS to hire an additional 

5,000 Border Patrol agents to ensure the safety and territorial integrity of the 

United States as well as to ensure that the Nation’s immigration laws are 

faithfully executed. In February 2017, the Secretary of Homeland Security 

issued a memorandum for Border Patrol to also hire mission support staff to 

support an increased number of Border Patrol agents. 

3 Department of Defense and Full Year Continuing Appropriations Act 2011 (Pub. L. No. 112-10, 

Section 1608 (April 15, 2011) 

www.oig.dhs.gov 2 OIG-19-23 
 

 

 

 

 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

In July 2017, we reported that DHS, CBP, and Border Patrol faced significant 

challenges identifying, recruiting, hiring, and fielding the number of officers 

and agents mandated in the Executive Order and the Secretary’s memo.4 In the 

report, we indicated that neither CBP nor Border Patrol could provide complete 

data to support the operational need or deployment strategies for the additional 

5,000 agents that the administration directed them to hire. CBP officials said 

they worked for 3 to 4 years, but were still 3 to 4 more years from 

implementing a process to obtain and analyze accurate operational needs and 

deployment data. This data included tracking mission-essential functions as 

well as employee work hours spent conducting these functions. 

We conducted this audit to determine to what extent Border Patrol agents meet 

workload requirements related to investigative and law enforcement activities. 

Results of Audit 

Border Patrol lacks the data and procedures needed to determine whether it is 

meeting workload requirements related to investigative and law enforcement 

activities. Although directed to do so by Congress in 2011, neither CBP nor 

Border Patrol has completed or submitted a satisfactory workforce staffing 

model as required. This occurred because Border Patrol has not prioritized or 

assigned adequate resources to develop and implement such a model to guide 

its hiring and operations. Without a complete workforce staffing model and 

accurate data, Border Patrol senior managers are unable to definitively 

determine the operational need or best placement for the 5,000 agents DHS 

was directed to hire per the January 2017 Executive Order. 

Additionally, Border Patrol officials do not consistently schedule agents’ work 

duties or accurately document actual work hours and duties completed. These 

deficiencies occurred due to a lack of standard operating procedures, training, 

and oversight of the information entered into its Border Patrol Enforcement 

Tracking System. As a result, Border Patrol may not be deploying existing 

agents in the most efficient and economical manner. In FY 2017, Border Patrol 

agents received approximately $55.2 million for 1.3 million hours of work that 

had no supporting documentation to show agents were working as needed to 

fulfill mission requirements. Good data is essential for Border Patrol to 

determine its existing and future operational and workload requirements 

accurately. 

4 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 

www.oig.dhs.gov 3 OIG-19-23 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Border Patrol Has Not Completed a Workforce Staffing Model 

Although directed to do so by Congress more than 5 years ago, CBP and Border 

Patrol have not implemented a workforce staffing model for Border Patrol. 

Specifically, in 2011, the U.S. House of Representatives Appropriations 

Committee directed CBP to submit a 5-year staffing and deployment plan for 

Border Patrol.5 

After CBP submitted the plan (known as the Border Patrol Staffing Plan) in 

2013, the Committee stated that the plan failed to address any goals for border 

security that would shape staffing and resource deployment or note any factors 

that affect deployment. Therefore, the Committee directed CBP to provide a 

more complete 5-year staffing and deployment plan, by December 1, 2013, that 

justified the funded staffing level in detail, including the tasks performed by 

agents; identified factors related to deployment by sector; and cited criteria and 

options for redistributing resources to address existing and emerging threats. 

However, Border Patrol officials stated they never completed the plan as 

required. This occurred because Border Patrol did not prioritize or provide 

adequate resources to develop and implement a workforce staffing model to 

guide Border Patrol’s hiring and operations as required by Congress. 

Instead, Border Patrol considered Congress’ direction and continued developing 

two other workforce staffing plans already underway. First, Border Patrol’s 

Mission Readiness Operations Directorate was in the process of developing the 

Manpower Requirements Determination (MRD), a methodology to establish a 

standard organizational structure across the Border Patrol and a foundation to 

create a workload-based staffing approach. Border Patrol began to identify all 

job functions occurring within the organization to allow for the development of 

a process to track the daily work conducted by all employees, not just agents. 

The process standardized border security tasks referred to as the “Patrol 

Border Group.” Second, in 2016 while MRD development was ongoing, Border 

Patrol’s Strategic Planning and Analysis Directorate also began developing a 

staffing methodology referred to as the Personnel Requirements Determination. 

This effort was supposed to produce a decision support tool to provide leaders 

recommendations for staffing based on numerous factors, such as analyzing 

how many agents are needed at each checkpoint. 

By the time we completed our audit work in March 2018, the Border Patrol had 

not completed the MRD or the Personnel Requirements Determination; both 

offices continued their similar efforts, and neither CBP nor Border Patrol had 

5 Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Bill, 2012, H.R. Rep. 112-91, p. 145 (May 26, 

2011). The Report accompanied Continuing Appropriations Act, 2012 Pub. L. No. 112-33 

(September 30, 2011) 

www.oig.dhs.gov 4 OIG-19-23 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

submitted a workforce staffing model as required by Congress. Without a 

complete workforce staffing model, Border Patrol cannot definitively determine 

the operational need or best placement for the 5,000 additional Border Patrol 

agents it was directed to hire in the January 2017 Executive Order. 

Lacking a complete workforce staffing model, Border Patrol’s approximately 

19,300 agents also may not be operating in the most efficient and economical 

manner. For example, Border Patrol agents are not always conducting primary 

law enforcement duties. A lack of mission support personnel in U. S. Border 

Patrol forces Border Patrol agents to conduct support functions. These support 

functions include clearing brush on roads, moving ground sensors, fixing the 

border fence, managing station budgets, and serving as full-time vehicle 

maintenance managers. 

Border Patrol officials are aware of this staffing problem and have run an 

exercise to better understand the impact. For example, in 2017, Border Patrol 

senior officials in Rio Grande Valley (RGV) Sector conducted a 2-week sectorwide mission readiness exercise, and captured the outcomes in their Green Pay 

Period Report. The exercise focused on moving agents and supervisory agents 

out of the mission support roles they were filling, and returning them back to 

their primary border enforcement duties. The effort returned more than 500 

agents back to the field to actively patrol the border. 

According to Border Patrol, compared to the pay periods immediately before 

and after the exercise, RGV apprehensions increased by 2.72 percent, and 

“turnbacks” increased by 7.60 percent.6 By returning agents to border patrol 

duties from mission support roles, Border Patrol RGV Sector increased its 

apprehension and turnback rates. In addition, and more importantly, RGV 

“gotaways” also increased by 25.23 percent.7 By returning more agents to the 

field, the sector actually determined that more people were entering the 

country illegally than it had previously identified. 

Although Border Patrol ran the Green Pay Period exercise at one sector, the 

exercise demonstrated the effect that additional mission support personnel 

could have on allowing agents already in the Border Patrol to conduct their 

primary law enforcement duties to interdict aliens and narcotics illegally 

entering the country. 

6 “Turnbacks” are individuals attempting to enter the United States illegally who are deterred 

and returned to Mexico based on Border Patrol agents’ presence patrolling the border. 

7 “Gotaways” are individuals observed by Border Patrol agents who illegally entered the United 

States but were not caught. 

www.oig.dhs.gov 5 OIG-19-23 
 

 

 

 

 

 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Border Patrol Enforcement Tracking System Not Consistently 

Updated 

According to OMB Circular A-123, Management’s Responsibility for Enterprise 

Risk Management and Internal Control, management is responsible for 

establishing and maintaining internal control to achieve the objectives of 

effective and efficient operations, reliable financial reporting, and compliance 

with applicable laws and regulations. However, Border Patrol officials did not 

consistently schedule agents’ work duties, or accurately document work hours 

and duties completed. Border Patrol uses two separate systems for scheduling 

agents’ work and recording their actual work hours for payroll purposes. 

Supervisors use the Border Patrol Enforcement Tracking System (BPETS) to 

make changes and set the schedule for agents’ hours in advance of work 

performed. BPETS has mission-essential function categories for supervisors to 

assign agents specific duties, down to a 15-minute interval if necessary. (See 

appendix C for a complete list of duties.) However, once the workday is over, 

supervisors and agents are not required to, and usually do not, update BPETS 

with actual work duties completed. To record actual hours for payroll 

purposes, agents manually input their time into the CBP Overtime Scheduling 

System (COSS). In contrast to BPETS, COSS does not track the detailed 

mission-essential function categories; it only accounts for hours worked and 

leave. 

The inaccuracies occurred because Border Patrol lacks standard operating 

procedures, training, or oversight of the information entered into BPETS for 

types and hours of work scheduled, and the actual work performed. Border 

Patrol has basic user guides for BPETS, but has not created a comprehensive 

manual to show scheduling and tracking requirements or required agents to 

take training on the system’s functions or purpose. Additionally, Border Patrol 

does not require agents to account in BPETS for actual duties performed after 

their shifts. According to senior management at one Border Patrol sector, 

agents should make changes to the system on the hour; however, agents do 

not do this. Instead, agents leave assignments as they were scheduled in the 

system initially rather than updating them to reflect actual activities completed 

and associated hours. 

Conducting our analysis, we found large differences between the numbers of 

hours scheduled in BPETS and the amount of time paid for in COSS. For 

example, in FY 2017, Border Patrol paid approximately $55.2 million for 1.3 

million hours of work listed in COSS that had no corresponding scheduled 

hours in BPETS to support the costs. Without accurate data, Border Patrol will 

remain unable to manage its workforce in a more efficient and economical 

manner. 

www.oig.dhs.gov 6 OIG-19-23 
 

 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Conclusion 

Border Patrol needs to manage its workforce more efficiently, effectively, and 

economically. CBP and Border Patrol must expedite the development and 

implementation of a workforce staffing model for Border Patrol as required by 

Congress. Without a complete workforce staffing model, Border Patrol senior 

managers are unable to definitively determine the operational needs for, or best 

placement of, the 5,000 additional agents DHS was directed to hire per the 

January 2017 Executive Order. 

Border Patrol also needs to improve tracking of its agents’ scheduled and 

completed duties. Lacking standard operating procedures, training, and 

oversight of the information entered into BPETS to document work scheduled 

versus actual work performed, Border Patrol may not be deploying its agents in 

the right locations and in the right manner to fulfill its mission. Good data is 

essential for Border Patrol to determine both its existing and future operational 

and workload requirements accurately. 

Recommendations 

Recommendation 1: We recommend the Under Secretary for Management of 

DHS ensure CBP and Border Patrol expedite development and implementation 

of a workforce staffing model for U.S. Border Patrol as required by Congress to 

better inform staffing and resource deployment decisions. 

Recommendation 2: We recommend the Under Secretary for Management of 

DHS ensure CBP and Border Patrol develop standard operating procedures for 

the Border Patrol Enforcement Tracking System; train agents on BPETS’ use, 

capabilities, and purpose; and implement and monitor internal controls for 

BPETS to ensure timely and accurate scheduling and reporting on agents’ 

actual and completed work hours and activities. 

Management Comments and OIG Analysis 

The Department concurred with our two 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. 

Although the Department concurred with both our recommendations, we 

believe some of the statements regarding the “staffing model/decision support 

www.oig.dhs.gov 7 OIG-19-23 
 

 

 

 

 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

tool” referred to in DHS’ management comments are misleading and incorrect. 

To illustrate, the Patrol Border Group (initial version) described in the 

management comments is not a comprehensive workforce “staffing 

model/decision support tool” as implied. Rather, it is a standardized list of 

border security tasks. We recognize this list is a key step in the process, but it 

should not be described as a workforce staffing model. 

Further, the Department’s assertion that completing the Patrol Border Group in 

September 2017 was 2 years ahead of schedule is incorrect. The Border Patrol 

completed the Patrol Border Group under the Manpower Requirement 

Determination effort, and CBP reported this to Congress in its January 2016 

report, Comprehensive Border Patrol Staffing Analysis. By restating a completed 

action, CBP makes the Patrol Border Group work appear to be a new, separate 

action. 

Our overall concern remains that 8 years after Congress’ 2011 mandate, 

Border Patrol still lacks the data and procedures needed to determine whether 

it is meeting workload requirements related to investigative and law 

enforcement activities. A summary of the Department’s response to our report 

and our analysis follows. 

DHS Response to Recommendation #1: Concur. The DHS Under Secretary 

for Management maintains oversight of component manpower modeling efforts 

and has already taken steps to help CBP complete the U.S. Border Patrol 

workforce staffing model. To improve integration of human capital into the 

Department’s Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution processes, on 

October 1, 2018, the Under Secretary realigned the DHS Manpower and 

Organization function from the DHS Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer 

to the Program Analysis and Evaluation Division within the DHS Office of the 

Chief Financial Officer. These two groups are increasing collaboration to ensure 

human capital requirements are incorporated into program analyses. The 

Manpower and Organization staff will also task Border Patrol to provide 

periodic, focused updates on the progress of its workforce staffing model 

development. Estimated Completion Date: September 30, 2019 

OIG Analysis: We consider these proposed actions responsive to the 

recommendation, which is resolved and open. We will make a determination to 

close this recommendation after we review the overdue workforce staffing 

model that allows Border Patrol senior managers to definitively determine the 

operational needs and best placement of Border Patrol agents. 

DHS Response to Recommendation #2: Concur. The Border Patrol Strategic 

Planning and Analysis Directorate will develop and implement policies and 

www.oig.dhs.gov 8 OIG-19-23 
 

 

 

 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

procedures; train agents on BPETS’ use, capabilities, and purpose; and 

implement and monitor internal controls for BPETS. In addition, according to 

the Border Patrol Strategic Planning and Analysis Directorate, it would: 

•	 compile/revise the complete BPETS user manual by November 30, 2018; 

•	 issue additional guidance regarding BPETS use and data integrity by 

December 31, 2018; 

•	 produce and deploy training on timesheet usage, as well as additional 

timesheet training at the Academy by January 31, 2019; 

•	 publish a standard operating procedure for BPETS; 

•	 push BPETS time and attendance data to CBP’s financial systems of 

record, called Systems, Applications & Products; and 

•	 introduce system checks to improve data integrity by April 30, 2019. 

Estimated completion date: April 30, 2019 

OIG Analysis: We consider these proposed actions responsive to the 

recommendation, which is resolved and open. CBP identified multiple actions 

in response to the recommendation. Before closing this recommendation, we 

will review all CBP’s actions, including those that CBP may have already 

completed. The recommendation will remain open until OIG confirms that CBP 

has completed the policies and procedures; implemented and is monitoring 

internal controls for BPETS; revised its BPETS manual, BPETS standard 

operating procedures, and a BPETS training program and schedule for BPETS 

and timesheet completion; and has completed its plan for monitoring data 

integrity. 

www.oig.dhs.gov 9	 OIG-19-23 
 

 

 

 

 

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. 

Our objective was to determine to what extent CBP’s Border Patrol agents meet 

workload requirements related to investigative and law enforcement activities. 

We focused our audit on the GS-1896 Border Patrol law enforcement 

occupational series. To answer our objective, we: 

•	 reviewed and analyzed the Border Patrol Agent Pay Reform Act of 2014 

(BPAPRA); 

•	 reviewed Office of Personnel Management (OPM) criteria on the law 

enforcement 1896 series; 

• obtained and reviewed departmental policies, procedures, and guidance 

relevant to tracking workload hours; 

•	 obtained and analyzed data tracked in BPETS and COSS for fiscal year 

2017; 

•	 interviewed U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation 

officials regarding best practices in tracking workload data, as well as 

CBP officials regarding BPAPRA, BPETS, and workforce planning; and 

•	 conducted site visits to four Border Patrol sectors, including 17 stations 

within those sectors, to interview agents and mission support personnel 

using a data collection instrument. We visited the following sectors and 

stations: 

o	 Detroit Sector 

 Detroit Station 

 Marysville Station 

 Gibraltar Station 

 Sandusky Bay Station 

o	 Miami Sector 

 Dania Beach Station 

 Marathon Station 

 West Palm Beach Station 

o	 Rio Grande Valley Sector 

 Brownsville Station 

 Central Processing Center 

 Fort Brown Station 

 Harlingen Station 

 McAllen Station 

www.oig.dhs.gov 10	 OIG-19-23 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

 Weslaco Station 

 Rio Grande City Station 

o San Diego Sector 

 Brown Field Station 

 Chula Vista Station 

 Imperial Beach Station 

We evaluated the reliability of BPETS, COSS, and Immigration and Customs 

Enforcement’s Office of Human Capital and OPM’s Federal employee listings 

data. We assessed the data in accordance with guidance in Assessing the 

Reliability of Computer-Processed Data, U.S. Government Accountability Office 

(GAO-09-680G, July 2009). We tested the accuracy of the agents’ scheduled 

time from BPETS and concluded that the data were of undetermined reliability. 

We assessed the BPETS data reliability by reviewing existing information about 

the data, conducting interviews with officials from the organization; performing 

tests on the data; tracing data to and from source documents; and reviewing 

selected system controls. 

We traced a sample from the BPETS G481’s Daily Unit Assignment Log that we 

requested during our fieldwork site visits to the BPETS database provided for 

FY 2017.8 Our review identified an inconsistency between the G481 source 

document and BPETS scheduled assignment. The data limitation prevented an 

adequate assessment of data reliability and prohibited us from precisely 

quantifying the hours Border Patrol agents spent on mission support 

functions. 

We assessed the reliability of the COSS data by: reviewing existing 

documentation related to the data sources; electronically testing the data to 

identify problems with completeness or accuracy; interviewing knowledgeable 

agency officials about the data; and tracing a judgmentally selected sample of 

data to source documents. We determined that the data were sufficiently 

reliable for the purposes of this report. 

We conducted this performance audit between June 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 objectives. 

8 Border Patrol stations used the G481 for an agent’s shift to depict daily assignments. 

www.oig.dhs.gov 11 OIG-19-23 
 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Appendix B 

CBP Comments to the Draft Report 

www.oig.dhs.gov 12 OIG-19-23 
 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

www.oig.dhs.gov 13 OIG-19-23 
 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

www.oig.dhs.gov 14 OIG-19-23 
 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

www.oig.dhs.gov 15 OIG-19-23 
 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Appendix C 

United States Border Patrol Staffing Assignments 

The following are mission-essential functions and related activities performed 

by GS-1896 Border Patrol agents. 

• Border Patrol Headquarters 

• Sector Headquarters Leadership 

• Collections 

• Intelligence Task Force/Liaison 

• Law Enforcement Technical 

Collection 

• Field Intelligence Team 

• Targeting and Analysis 

• Radio Room 

• Border Intelligence Center 

• Geospatial Information System 

• Border Patrol Tactical Unit 

• Border Patrol Search, Trauma, and 

Rescue Unit 

• Mobile Response Team 

• Alliance to Combat Transnational 

Threats 

• Specialty Programs 

• Strategic Planning and 

Coordination 

• Prosecutions 

• Foreign Operations 

• Training 

• Traumatic Incident Management 

• Policy and Compliance 

• Professional Standards 

• Station Leadership 

• Patrol Border 

• Off-Road Vehicles 

• Horse Patrol 

• Bike Patrol 

• Riverine 

• K-9 

• Detainee Processing 

• Traffic Check 

• Transportation Check 

• Supplemental Air Crew 

• Task Force/Liaison 

• Special Operations Group Related 

Activities 

• Conducting Field Training 

• Attending Training 

• Instructing at Academy 

• Drive time to/from area of 

responsibility (not including home 

to work) 

• Other assignment outside Border 

Patrol 

These functions and activities are categorized within Law Enforcement 

Operations, Law Enforcement Operational Programs, and Mission Readiness 

Operations or can be a combination of Operations, Programs, and Readiness. 

All functions within these categories are essential to the overall mission and 

operations of the Border Patrol. 

www.oig.dhs.gov 16 OIG-19-23 
 

 

 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Appendix D 

Office of Audits Major Contributors to This Report 

Christine Haynes, Director 

Andrew Smith, Audit Manager 

Peter Christopher, Auditor-in-Charge 

Corneliu Buzesan, Program Analyst 

Christopher Byerly, Program Analyst 

Renee Foote, Auditor-in-Charge 

Darvy Khun, Program Analyst 

Ryan Ten Eyck, Program Analyst 

Kevin Dolloson, Communications Analyst 

Brandon Landry, Independent Referencer 

www.oig.dhs.gov 17 OIG-19-23 
 

 

 

 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Appendix E 

Report Distribution 

Department of Homeland Security 

Secretary 

Deputy Secretary 

Chief of Staff 

General Counsel 

Under Secretary for Management 

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 

CBP Commissioner 

Acting Chief, U.S. Border Patrol 

CBP Liaison 

www.oig.dhs.gov 18 OIG-19-23 
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