Audit Division 20-068 June 2020

Office of the Inspector General

U.S. Department of Justice

OVERSIGHT ★ INTEGRITY ★ GUIDANCE

Audit of the Executive Office for 

Immigration Review’s Fiscal Year 

2019 Financial Management 

Practices

AUDIT OF THE EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION 

REVIEW’S FISCAL YEAR 2019 FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT 

PRACTICES 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................ 1 

OIG Audit Approach ................................................................................ 2 

AUDIT RESULTS ........................................................................................... 3 

FY 2019 EOIR Budget Request and Appropriation ....................................... 3 

EOIR’s FY 2019 Budget Request .................................................... 4 

FY 2019 Continuing Resolutions, Partial Government Shutdown, and 

Passage of Appropriations Bill ............................................... 6 

EOIR Director’s Emails Expressing Concern about the FY 2019 Enacted 

Appropriation and EOIR’s Ability to Conduct Operations ...................... 7 

Concerns about Ability to Hire Additional IJ Teams .......................... 8 

Concerns about Interpreter Contract Fees .................................... 11 

EOIR Office Space Renovation Costs ....................................................... 14 

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION ........................................................ 16 

APPENDIX 1: OBJECTIVE, SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY ................................... 17 

APPENDIX 2: EOIR DIRECTOR’S FEBRUARY 2019 EMAIL .................................. 19 

APPENDIX 3: EOIR DIRECTOR’S MARCH 2019 EMAIL ...................................... 20 

APPENDIX 4: EOIR BUDGET PROCESS TIMELINE ............................................ 22 

APPENDIX 5: EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW’S RESPONSE 

TO THE DRAFT AUDIT REPORT ............................................................ 23 

APPENDIX 6: OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL ANALYSIS AND SUMMARY 

OF ACTIONS NECESSARY TO CLOSE THE REPORT .................................. 26
1 

AUDIT OF THE EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION 

REVIEW’S FISCAL YEAR 2019 FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT 

PRACTICES 

INTRODUCTION 

The Department of Justice (DOJ) Executive Office for Immigration Review 

(EOIR) is responsible for adjudicating immigration cases. Led by a Director who is 

a career member of the Senior Executive Service and appointed by the Attorney 

General, EOIR is largely comprised of immigration judge teams who decide whether 

foreign-born individuals, charged by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security 

(DHS) with violating immigration laws, should be removed from or allowed to 

remain in the United States. Two of EOIR’s eight components are the Office of the 

Chief Immigration Judge, which handles most adjudications, and the Board of 

Immigration Appeals, which decides appeals from those adjudications.1 EOIR’s 

adjudicative functions occur at 69 immigration courts and adjudication centers 

across the United States, as well as at its headquarters in Falls Church, Virginia. 

In fiscal year (FY) 2019, Congress appropriated a total of over $628 million 

to EOIR – $563 million as part of the annual appropriation bill passed by Congress 

on February 15, 2019, and $65 million in a supplemental spending bill passed by 

Congress on July 1, 2019. On February 15, 2019, shortly after receiving its initial 

appropriation of $563 million, which equaled the amount requested for EOIR in the 

President’s budget, the EOIR Director sent an EOIR-wide email stating, among 

other things, that, “due to the nature and timing of the budget process, EOIR’s 

appropriation does not fully address all of its current operational needs,” and that 

“difficult financial decisions” would need to be made to ensure EOIR could continue 

to hire more immigration judges (IJs), address its case backlog, and implement a 

new electronic case management system. On March 6, 2019, the EOIR Director 

sent a second EOIR-wide email stating, among other things, that: (1) the budget 

process left EOIR “considerably short of being able to fulfill all of [its] current 

operational needs,” (2) interpreter costs were “expected to approach $110 million” 

in FY 2019, and (3) as a result, EOIR would have to make certain changes to its 

expenditures, including suspending an in-person IJ Training Conference in 2019, 

slowing the pace of hiring staff, and delaying the new electronic case management 

system.2

Thereafter, in July 2019, EOIR received $65 million in supplemental 

funding—$45 million for hiring additional staff for immigration judges, $10 million 

for the purchase or lease of courtroom space and equipment, and $10 million for 

1 Also within EOIR is the Office of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer, which adjudicates 

certain types of administrative cases, including cases concerning unauthorized employment of foreignborn individuals, unfair immigration-related employment practices, and immigration-related document 

fraud. 

2 For the February 2019 email, see Appendix 2. For the March 2019 email, see Appendix 3. 
2 

legal orientation programs for detained migrants.3 Terms of the supplemental 

funding required EOIR to spend the funds by the end of FY 2019. As of 

September 30, 2019, the end of FY 2019, EOIR had obligated: (1) $541 million 

(96 percent) of its $563 million FY 2019 appropriation, with the remaining 

$22 million authorized by Congress to remain available until expended; and 

(2) $63.5 million (98 percent) of the $65 million supplemental funding, with the 

remaining expiring at the end of the fiscal year. 

The February and March 2019 emails from the EOIR Director raised 

significant concerns across the Department and at OMB regarding EOIR’s ability to 

identify its budget needs and address its financial priorities, particularly since the 

initial FY 2019 appropriation of $563 million equaled the funding that EOIR had 

previously requested and that was included in the President’s FY 2019 budget. 

Similarly concerned was the Senate Appropriations Committee, which after the 

EOIR Director’s March 6 email advised the OIG that it was concerned about EOIR’s 

financial management practices in light of the email’s claim that EOIR did not have 

sufficient funding to carry out certain programmatic plans. Given these concerns of 

JMD, OMB, and Congress, the OIG initiated this audit. 

OIG Audit Approach 

The objective of this audit was to assess EOIR’s efforts to identify effectively 

its funding needs and execute its budget. The overall scope of our audit covered 

FY 2019, as well as the budget formulation phase that began 2 years prior, in the 

spring of 2017. To accomplish this objective, we assessed EOIR’s decision-making 

concerning budget planning and contract cost tracking, and we interviewed several 

Department-level and component-specific budget officials and executives, including 

the EOIR Director, regarding how they set FY 2019 financial policies and 

procedures. We further reviewed documents pertaining to setting EOIR financial 

priorities and decisions and toured EOIR offices in Falls Church, Virginia. Additional 

information on our objective, scope, and methodology can be found in Appendix 1. 

3 Pub. L. No. 116-26 (2019). 
3 

AUDIT RESULTS 

We identified weaknesses in EOIR’s budget planning process regarding its 

ability to track and forecast rising interpreter contract costs, which adversely 

affected EOIR’s budgeting of other financial resource needs. These weaknesses 

were evidenced by two EOIR-wide emails that the EOIR Director sent following the 

end of the partial federal government shutdown in January 2019 and the passage 

by Congress of EOIR’s FY 2019 appropriation bill in February 2019. The emails 

stated that the FY 2019 appropriation left EOIR “considerably short of being able to 

fulfill all of [EOIR’s] current operational needs” and called for “difficult financial 

decisions” and suspending certain anticipated EOIR initiatives. Notwithstanding, we 

determined that: (1) EOIR’s FY 2019 appropriation of $563 million was consistent 

with its FY 2019 budget request and (2) EOIR’s budget office had already developed 

plans to support EOIR operations within its $563 million appropriation. We 

identified three factors that contributed to the weaknesses identified in this report. 

First, EOIR leadership failed to coordinate effectively with its budget staff and with 

the Justice Management Division (JMD) on the status and impact of its FY 2019 

appropriation. Second, EOIR’s FY 2019 budget request, which it prepared in 2017, 

did not seek enough funding to cover what ultimately proved to be a much more 

substantial increase in interpreter fees than had been anticipated. EOIR knew in 

2017 that it would need to significantly increase its FY 2019 budget for interpreter 

fees because: (1) interpreter fees already constituted a significant portion of its 

budget, (2) planned changes to EOIR’s court docket would result in the need for 

additional interpreter services, and (3) JMD was renegotiating the interpreter 

contract because the contractor contended that existing fees were too low. Third, 

miscommunication across EOIR led to leadership miscalculating interpreter 

expenses following the shutdown and thus being unable to gauge in February 2019 

how much it had already spent on interpreters that year and its likely interpreter 

expenses for the remainder of FY 2019. 

This report examines what occurred leading up to and throughout EOIR’s 

FY 2019 budget planning and execution process. The first section presents a 

timeline of the FY 2019 budget process, starting from when EOIR first compiled its 

budget request in 2017, until February 15, 2019, when Congress passed FY 2019 

appropriations. This timeline includes the FY 2019 continuing resolutions (CRs) that 

began on October 1, 2018, and the partial federal government shutdown that 

ended on January 25, 2019. The second section outlines the two factors that 

influenced EOIR leadership’s perspective of having inadequate funding and the 

EOIR Director announcing budget restrictions via emails despite EOIR having 

received from Congress the full appropriation that it requested. The third section 

reviews EOIR’s headquarters office space renovation to address a separate concern 

received during the audit. 

FY 2019 EOIR Budget Request and Appropriation 

In preparing its annual budget request, EOIR works with JMD, which is 

responsible for planning and interfacing with the Office of Management and Budget 
4 

(OMB) on budget and financial matters across the DOJ.4 EOIR’s Office of 

Administration supports nearly all facets of EOIR financial management, including 

appropriations, budgets, contracts, and other procurement matters. The Office of 

Administration also develops and submits to the Deputy Director an operating plan 

to provide a high-level snapshot of how EOIR can best expend its available funding 

and maximize operations. 

As described in Appendix 4, the Department’s budget process begins 

approximately 18 months before the start of the fiscal year, when Department 

components are asked to prepare an initial budget request that is consistent with 

guidelines issued by OMB and the Department. Thus, for example, the budget 

process for FY 2019, which began on October 1, 2018, started in the spring of 

2017. In preparing EOIR’s initial budget request for JMD, the EOIR Office of 

Administration surveys EOIR divisions for anticipated program enhancement 

requests, such as additional government positions and other non-personnel 

expenses (e.g., equipment and services). EOIR also includes in its initial budget 

request technical adjustments to the baseline cost of current services to account for 

factors such as inflation, pay raises, and the annualization of new personnel 

salaries. After submitting its initial budget request to JMD, EOIR, like other 

Department components, engages in a dialogue with JMD and Department 

leadership about the request. The Department completes this internal budget 

process approximately 1 year before the start of the fiscal year, when it submits to 

OMB a proposed budget request for the Department and its components. 

Thereafter, a series of “passbacks” between EOIR, JMD, and OMB further refine 

EOIR’s budget request until it is finalized and incorporated as part of DOJ’s overall 

budget that is included in the President’s budget request to Congress.5 The 

President’s budget request is generally sent to Congress in February, approximately 

8 months prior to the start of the fiscal year. 

EOIR’s FY 2019 Budget Request

As noted above, the Department’s FY 2019 budget process began in spring 

2017, before the President’s FY 2018 budget request had been submitted to 

Congress and thus while Congress was still considering the FY 2018 budget.6 In 

preparing FY 2019 budget submissions, JMD directed EOIR and other Department 

components to apply, as the starting point for its initial FY 2019 budget request, 

the amount included in the President’s FY 2018 budget to Congress. Accordingly, 

EOIR applied $500.4 million as its baseline figure, which was the amount of the 

President’s FY 2018 budget request. Following passbacks and baseline adjustments, 

EOIR’s final FY 2019 budget request totaled approximately $563 million and 

included: 

4 JMD also supports many DOJ-wide procurements, including, as discussed in more detail 

below, interpreter services that EOIR immigration judges need in immigration cases. 

5 EOIR’s budget operations as it pertains to and interacts with the DOJ’s complete budget 

cycle can be found at Appendix 4. 

6 EOIR’s FY 2019 budget process began under a former Director and was finalized after the 

current Director was appointed at the end of May 2017. 
5 

 Adjusting the planned allocation of funds for interpreter fees and associated 

costs, which EOIR anticipated rising from $27 million in FY 2017 to over $65 

million in FY 2019; 

 A $40 million enhancement to hire 450 employees to staff 75 additional IJ 

teams (each comprised of an IJ and a number of support employees, such as 

clerks and administrative specialists); and 

 A $25 million enhancement to modernize its case management technology.7

Although EOIR’s FY 2019 budget request anticipated that contract interpreter 

costs would rise, as discussed below, the actual rise in interpreter costs was even 

greater than EOIR had projected. Therefore, despite increases in funding, the 

FY 2019 budget proved insufficient to cover the actual increase in EOIR contract 

interpreter costs. 

The President’s FY 2019 budget, which was released to Congress in February 

2018, included in its entirety EOIR’s $563 million funding request. However, one 

month later, in March 2018, Congress enacted the Department’s FY 2018 

appropriation bill and set EOIR’s budget at $504.5 million for FY 2018, or over $4 

million more than EOIR’s FY 2018 budget request. The EOIR Director stated that 

the baseline figure of $500.4 million used in EOIR’s FY 2019 budget request was 

thus “automatically short” as it was $4 million less than the enacted FY 2018 

budget. We noted, however, that the differential between a $567 million budget 

request, had EOIR’s FY 2018 enacted appropriation been used in calculating EOIR’s 

base for its FY 2019 budget request, and the President’s $563 million budget 

request is slightly less than one percent. 

Subsequent to the submission of the President’s FY 2019 budget request for 

EOIR, the House of Representatives and the Senate passed separate appropriation 

bills, or marks. The Senate mark provided EOIR with the amount requested in the 

President’s budget of $563 million, but the House mark funded EOIR at $630 

million. The additional $67-million included in the House of Representatives’ mark 

was intended to provide EOIR with funds to recruit 25 additional IJ teams (for a 

total of 100 more IJ teams than EOIR had in 2018), fully annualize salaries of new 

employees from the year prior, and upgrade information technology systems and 

facilities. Thereafter, the EOIR Office of Administration prepared operating plans 

for both the Senate and the higher House mark. For the Senate mark, EOIR’s 

operating plan identified a $600 million operating budget (which did not equate to 

7 Both enhancements concerned established priorities detailed in the DOJ Strategic Plan. The 

DOJ Strategic Plan for 2018 – 2022 places an increased emphasis on EOIR operations. The plan 

identifies “Secure the Borders and Enhance Immigration Enforcement and Adjudication” as one of four 

DOJ strategic goals. A subpart of this goal is improving the adjudication of immigration cases in the 

administrative immigration courts. To achieve this directive, the DOJ plan specifies that EOIR will 

need to update its caseload management, expand its use of technology and data in operations and 

decision making, increase the number of immigration judges and courtrooms, and reduce case 

processing time. 
6 

either of the two marks, but rather was near the midpoint between the two), and 

then presented a $37 million reduction in expenditures under that plan. 

FY 2019 Continuing Resolutions, Partial Government Shutdown, and Passage of 

Appropriations Bill

Congress did not pass an appropriation bill for the Department, and did not 

resolve the differing House and Senate marks for EOIR, prior to the start of FY 2019. 

Instead, from October 1, 2018 (the start of FY 2019), until December 22, 2018, 

EOIR and the rest of the DOJ operated under a series of continuing resolutions 

(CRs). The CRs provided EOIR with an apportioned budget, sustaining it at the 

same level of funding it had received in FY 2018, but restricting any program 

growth or hiring. At the time of the CRs, EOIR budget officials developed an 

operating plan to guide EOIR finances, which we found to be in line with CR 

apportionments. As examples of efforts to keep EOIR within its CR apportionment 

throughout the fiscal year, the operating plan developed under the CR either 

restricted or anticipated restricting employee travel and training, hiring, personnel 

contracting, and the implementation of IT systems. Both the EOIR Director and the 

Director of the Office of Administration stated that EOIR was prepared to “live 

within its means,” and that there were no plans at any time during the CR period to 

have it spend more than its allotted funding. 

We discussed this CR operating plan with the EOIR Director, who stated that 

while he saw the operating plan only briefly, he believed that the plan was effective 

at keeping EOIR operations funded during the CRs. However, the EOIR Director 

speculated that EOIR’s continuing operations would have become more tenuous the 

longer the CRs were in effect. Indeed, we confirmed that large portions of EOIR’s 

full-year budget, including major contracts and rent costs, were not due until later 

in the fiscal year. Consequently, any operating plans covering just the first months 

of FY 2019 were largely unaffected by CR funding restrictions. Nevertheless, the 

EOIR Director told us that, considering the rapidly expanding nature and capacity of 

EOIR, as well as its growing interpreter costs and needs, the CRs hampered EOIR’s 

efforts to expand its hiring and implement planned upgrades. 

On December 22, 2018, funding under the last CR lapsed, and many federal 

agencies, including the Department, shut down due to a lack of funding. Although 

some EOIR functions continued during this shutdown, primarily detained immigrant 

hearings, the majority of EOIR staff, including those in the Office of Administration, 

were furloughed. In late January 2019, the partial government shutdown ended, 

including at DOJ, when Congress passed and the President signed another CR. 

Finally, in mid-February, the Department’s FY 2019 appropriations bill was enacted 

into law, which included an appropriation of $563 million for EOIR. This amount 

reflected the lower Senate mark rather than the significantly higher House mark of 

$630 million. 

EOIR’s Director told us that, in previous years, the conference process for 

appropriation bills resulted in EOIR receiving the higher of the two marks. He thus 

anticipated that EOIR’s enacted appropriation would ultimately align with what was 
7 

then the higher House mark.8 However, EOIR officials stated that the House 

changed its mark in early January 2019 to align with the Senate mark. Because 

this change occurred when many relevant EOIR and JMD personnel were furloughed 

due to the shutdown, EOIR officials stated to us that there was no way to address 

the changed mark before the shutdown ended. 

Following the end of the shutdown, EOIR officials stated that they reached out 

to the Department on February 14, 2019, about the status of the mark, and 

Department officials advised they could not do anything to address the situation. 

On February 15, 2019, EOIR’s Director sent an EOIR-wide email announcing 

that the FY 2019 appropriation did not address all of EOIR’s operational funding 

needs and that “difficult financial decisions” would need to be made to ensure EOIR 

could continue to hire more IJs, address its case backlog, and implement a new 

electronic case management system. The following month, on March 6, the EOIR 

Director sent a second EOIR-wide email stating that: (1) the budget process left 

EOIR “considerably short of being able to fulfill all of [its] current operational 

needs,” (2) interpreter costs were “expected to approach $110 million” in FY 2019, 

and (3) as a result, EOIR would have to make certain changes to its expenditures, 

including suspending an in-person IJ Training Conference in 2019, slowing the pace 

of hiring staff, and delaying the new electronic case management system. As we 

discuss in the next section, neither of these emails accurately reflected EOIR’s 

financial situation. 

EOIR Director’s Emails Expressing Concern about the FY 2019 Enacted 

Appropriation and EOIR’s Ability to Conduct Operations 

The EOIR Director told us that once the partial federal government shutdown 

ended, he discussed the enacted FY 2019 budget with budget teams at both EOIR 

and JMD. JMD advised there was nothing that could be done to change the enacted 

budget, causing what the Director characterized and perceived as EOIR not being 

able to meet its operational needs, at least compared to the $630-million figure of 

the original House mark. 

Notwithstanding, we found that EOIR budget staff was aware of EOIR 

appropriations and taking action to ensure it could sustain mission-critical 

operations with its appropriation. Specifically, EOIR’s Office of Administration 

officials told us they worked with JMD Budget Staff to review EOIR’s budget and 

resulting operating plan in March 2019 to confirm that the $563-million enacted FY 

2019 appropriation did not place EOIR in a budget shortfall status. EOIR budget 

officials likewise told us that the lower appropriation amount did not constitute a 

budget shortfall, and stated that the lower appropriation merely meant that staffing 

and technology upgrades planned for the House mark of $630 million would be 

rolled out at a slower rate or delayed. 

8 It appears the EOIR Director was not alone in assuming a larger EOIR appropriation. In 

September 2018, prior to enactment of the FY 2019 appropriation, JMD submitted EOIR’s FY 2020 

budget request to OMB applying the $630 million mark as EOIR’s budget baseline. 
8 

The EOIR Director stated that while he never personally believed that EOIR 

would be “insolvent” due to the lower Senate appropriation, the lower appropriation 

meant that EOIR would not be able to implement important, planned initiatives and 

upgrades. The EOIR Director further stated that he sent the February 15 and 

March 6 emails concerning the budget situation in an effort to promote 

transparency with his IJs and other EOIR employees. We asked the EOIR Director 

what he meant when he stated in his March 6 email, “the FY 2019 budget process 

has left us considerably short of being able to fulfill all of our current operational 

needs.” The Director told us that because the email’s intended audience was 

EOIR’s IJs and staff, not anyone outside of EOIR, by “needs” he meant obtaining 

the personnel and services the IJs needed to do their jobs, such as clerks and IT 

support. The Director stated that he did not intend the email to imply that EOIR 

could not fulfill its mission. The EOIR Director told us that the internally developed 

operating plan did not affect his decision to send out his EOIR-wide emails or 

otherwise affect the financial decisions included in the emails. 

While a number of EOIR officials, including budget officials that had drafted 

operating plans to fully effectuate EOIR operations with FY 2019 funding, told us 

that they expressly advised the EOIR Director not to send out his March 6 email, 

the EOIR Director stated that he nevertheless sent both emails because he believed 

that his staff needed to know the reasons for making tough budget decisions. 

While the decision whether to send emails about a component’s budgetary situation 

is a discretionary one for the component head to make, we believe that any such 

emails should accurately describe the component’s financial situation. In this case, 

that did not occur, particularly with respect to the Director’s statement that EOIR 

was “considerably short of being able to fulfill all of [its] current operational needs.” 

In our opinion, readers of the March 6 email could reasonably have been left with 

the impression that EOIR was experiencing a budget shortfall, despite that in reality 

EOIR’s budget staff was taking action to ensure it could sustain mission-critical 

operations with its appropriation. 

Concerns about Ability to Hire Additional IJ Teams 

According to the Department’s FY 2019 Performance and Budget Summary 

for EOIR, the “largest challenge facing the immigration courts is the growing 

pending caseload.”9 EOIR reported that the number of new cases filed annually by 

DHS grew by 63 percent, from over 193,000 in 2015 to over 315,000 in 2018. 

EOIR also reported that, during that same period, the number of annual case 

adjudications by EOIR increased. EOIR adjudicated about 200,000 cases in 

FY 2018, or 36 percent more than it completed in FY 2015. This was supported, at 

least in part, by budget increases that allowed EOIR to hire more IJs. However, as 

shown in Figure 1, despite hearing and completing more cases, EOIR’s backlog 

grew from approximately 460,000 cases at the end of FY 2015 to nearly 800,000 

cases at the end of FY 2018, a 73 percent increase during that 3-year period. 

9 https://www.justice.gov/jmd/page/file/1033216/download


11 

Concerns about Interpreter Contract Fees 

One of the primary concerns of the EOIR Director, when he learned in 

February 2019 that EOIR’s FY 2019 appropriation was lower than he had 

anticipated, was whether EOIR would have the ability to fund the increasing cost of 

interpreter services. As described below, due to both rising contract rates and the 

growth of EOIR’s caseload, the cost of interpreter services had increased over 300 

percent, from approximately $14 million in FY 2015 to just under $60 million in 

FY 2018. As we discuss in this section, due to how EOIR tracked and processed 

interpreter contract services, as well as the communication challenges it 

experienced associated with this contract, EOIR leadership did not accurately 

forecast future interpreter contract costs for FY 2019. 

EOIR’s IJ teams heavily rely on interpreter services provided under a national 

contract awarded and administered by JMD since 2015. In late 2016, the 

interpreter contractor petitioned JMD to modify the award, citing significant changes 

in the market for interpreters that impacted the contractor’s ability to meet EOIR 

needs and ensure that contract interpreters would meet the contract’s 98-percent 

appearance rate.13 EOIR considers this contract critical, as much of its operations 

and adjudications depend on interpreter services. JMD Procurement Services Staff 

told us that procuring a new contract would have taken a significant amount of time 

and left EOIR without interpreter support, at least during the procurement period. 

Accordingly, JMD renegotiated a modified contract, effective September 2017, 

which increased both the price for each hour of interpreter services and the 

minimum hour requirement. According to JMD officials, the renegotiated rates were 

consistent with industry standards based on other JMD interpreter contracts. 

EOIR submitted its budget request to JMD in June 2017, while JMD was still 

negotiating the new interpreter contract rates. While the FY 2019 request 

forecasted interpreter fees and associated costs rising from $27 million in FY 2017 

to over $65 million in FY 2019, this request did not fully account for increased 

interpreter costs that ultimately resulted from: (1) EOIR’s increasing caseload, 

(2) the anticipated significant rate increases in the renegotiated interpreter 

contract, and (3) the hiring of additional IJs to process additional cases. We found 

that these factors did, indeed, lead to an even more substantial increase in 

interpreter costs than EOIR had otherwise anticipated. At the time of the partial 

government shutdown in December 2018, EOIR leadership expected interpreter 

contract costs to rise from $59 million in FY 2018 to $80 million for FY 2019, based 

on the renegotiated interpreter contract and the increase in judges and caseloads, 

13 The interpreter contractor must provide interpreters within EOIR hearing locations 

wherever required by the government, within the U.S. and its territories. All interpretation service 

requirements are expected to be filled, regardless of the timing of the court order. EOIR measures the 

appearance rate as the number of interpreters provided versus the number interpreters required by 

the Government. 
12 

which was approximately $15 million more than what EOIR had factored into its FY 

2019 budget request.14

Compounding this situation, soon after the shutdown, EOIR leadership stated 

that it received notice from staff that the prior month’s interpreter fees totaled 

about $9 million, which, if annualized, would approach about $110 million. The 

$110 million figure was 38 percent more than its previous estimate of $80 million 

for FY 2019 and 86 percent more than what it spent for these services in FY 2018. 

EOIR’s FY 2019 budget submission had not anticipated such a level of additional 

costs for interpreters, and therefore, EOIR officials stated that the $563 million 

appropriation appeared to be even less adequate than what EOIR had anticipated in 

December 2018 to meet all of EOIR’s budget priorities. 

On March 6, 2019, the EOIR Director sent his second EOIR-wide email citing 

the $110 million figure as one of the reasons for his concerns about a budget 

shortfall. We determined that, by March 8, an EOIR official had provided the 

revised $110 million figure to both JMD and Congress. However, thirteen days 

later, on March 19, 2019, an EOIR employee emailed the EOIR Administration 

Office to advise the Office that the $110 million estimate that was based on the $9 

million figure might not have been accurate. EOIR employees could neither explain 

to us how staff calculated the $9 million nor provide to us invoices or other 

contemporaneous documentation to support the $9 million figure. One EOIR official 

stated that once the $9 million figure was cited, it took on “a life of its own” in an 

atmosphere of general confusion immediately following the partial federal 

government shutdown. On or about March 20, 2019, EOIR confirmed that the 

$110 million figure was overstated and EOIR leadership alerted the JMD 

congressional liaison officer, who told us she subsequently notified congressional 

staff of the issue. The Director told us that he chose not to send a third EOIR-wide 

communication to correct any inaccuracies in his previous communications because 

he experienced what he considered a “backlash” after sending the previous emails. 

We identified two issues that we believe sustained EOIR leadership’s general 

confusion and misunderstanding over EOIR interpreter contract funding. The first 

issue involves how EOIR and JMD interfaced to process and track interpreter 

invoices. As end users of the interpreter contract, EOIR received and processed 

interpreter invoices through the Unified Financial Management System (UFMS). 

However, JMD certified and paid contractor invoices as the administrating 

component of the contract. While EOIR tracked interpreter invoices and knew how 

much it had spent on interpreter costs at any one time, it did not track invoices to 

specific timeframes.15 In a billing environment in which EOIR received multiple 

invoices covering different periods of service, EOIR could not readily ascertain how 

14 After the partial government shutdown ended, the EOIR Director and Chief of Staff briefed 

the Appropriations Committee regarding the FY 2019 appropriation. The document prepared by EOIR 

to guide this brief included this estimate of FY 2019 interpreter costs. 

15 In response to an OIG request, EOIR-generated lists of obligations only reflected two 

obligations in FY 2018 to the contract provider, totaling $9.8 million, and no contract provider 

obligations in FY 2019. 
13 

much it spent during a specific period. As a result, leadership was not able to make 

effective budgeting decisions following the partial federal government shutdown. 

Second, the annual performance period for EOIR interpreter contracts starts 

on September 1 and ends on August 31. This causes the contract’s performance 

period to span across federal fiscal years, which begin on October 1. Therefore, 

EOIR applies funds from more than one fiscal year to the contract. For example, 

EOIR obligated $21 million in FY 2017 funds to support the interpreter contract that 

began on September 1, 2017. Similarly, EOIR obligated $9.8 million in FY 2018 

funds to the interpreter contract that took effect on September 1, 2018. Though 

we found permissible the practice of applying current year funds to contracts with 

performance periods predominantly in the following fiscal year, this practice 

increased the risk that EOIR budget planning personnel would inaccurately 

extrapolate or otherwise miscalculate subsequent FY funding needs.16

We determined that this hindered the ability of EOIR leadership to forecast 

and communicate accurate budget and financial needs. Based on itemized lists of 

task order obligations and disbursements provided by EOIR as well as data in UFMS 

for the performance year ending August 30, 2019, EOIR had obligated $74.4 million 

on the interpreter contract, or approximately 33 percent less than the incorrectly 

derived $110 million and in line with the original $80 million estimate. 

In FY 2019, JMD Finance Staff, Offices, Boards, and Divisions Outreach & 

Support (OOS) provided onsite support to EOIR and the Office of Administration. 

As part of its support, OOS subsequently assessed EOIR’s current financial 

management processes, assisted in the validation and closeout of open financial 

items, and recommended process improvements. In December 2019, OOS 

provided seven policy and procedure recommendations to EOIR to improve 

efficiency and effectiveness within the Office of Administration. As a result of these 

recommendations, EOIR reported that an official has been tasked with tracking all 

interpreter contract invoices and expenses and its Office of Administration has 

revised budget and cost estimating policies. 

Stronger controls surrounding EOIR’s use of information will enhance its 

ability to plan for and report its financial management needs. It is the 

responsibility of EOIR leadership to maintain an accurate understanding of funds in 

order to accurately forecast and oversee their use.17 JMD officials told us that they 

can configure UFMS to produce enhanced budget monitoring reports that report 

real-time interpreter expenditure information to EOIR decision makers. EOIR’s 

ongoing work with JMD to improve interpreter contract oversight presents an 

opportunity for EOIR to obtain such enhanced budget monitoring reports and, thus, 

16 Statutory exceptions to the bona fide needs rule (31 U.S.C. § 1502) allow an agency to use 

current year funds for contracts beginning in one fiscal year and ending in the next fiscal year for 

specific situations. See 41 U.S.C. § 3902 (procurement contracts for severable services not to exceed 

1 year). 

17 Principle 13.04 of the Federal Internal Controls Standards requires federal agencies to 

obtain relevant data from reliable internal and external sources in a timely manner based on the 

identified information requirements. 

15 

department head who is a presidential appointee.19 However, EOIR officials told us 

that JMD confirmed that this and other similar limits are not applicable to the EOIR 

Director, who is a career member of the Senior Executive Service and appointed by 

the Attorney General, and thus not a presidential appointee.

19 This established limit was reiterated by Pub. L. No. 116-6 (2019), Section 710 (“During the 

period in which the head of any department or agency, or any other officer or civilian employee of the 

Federal Government appointed by the President of the United States, holds office, no funds may be 

obligated or expended in excess of $5,000 to furnish or redecorate the office of such department 

head, agency head, officer or employee, or to purchase furniture or make improvements for any such 

office, unless advance notice of such furnishing or redecoration is transmitted to the Committees on 

Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate. For the purposes of this section, the 

term ‘office’ shall include the entire suite of offices assigned to the individual, as well as any other 

space used primarily by the individual or the use of which is directly controlled by the individual.”) 
16 

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION 

We identified weaknesses in EOIR’s budget planning process, including EOIR 

leadership failing to coordinate effectively with its budget staff and JMD. EOIR’s 

need to address the increase in immigration case referrals and growing backlog of 

cases by hiring additional IJ teams, and general confusion and miscommunication 

regarding renegotiated interpreter costs contributed to the EOIR Director’s decision 

to announce, via EOIR-wide emails, plans to reduce or temporarily suspend certain 

FY 2019 initiatives. While a number of EOIR officials—including budget officials that 

had drafted operating plans to effectuate EOIR operations with FY 2019 funding— 

stated that they expressly advised the EOIR Director against sending out his March 

6, 2019, email announcing EOIR-wide budget cuts, the EOIR Director stated that he 

nevertheless sent this email because he believed that his staff needed to know the 

reasons for making tough budget decisions. The EOIR Director emphasized to us 

that his intent was to explain his decisions solely to an EOIR audience; however, he 

conceded that his communication could have been, and ultimately was, understood 

by those outside of EOIR as EOIR experiencing a budget shortfall. 

EOIR leadership’s lack of knowledge regarding the status of interpreter 

contract funds subsequently hindered its ability to communicate accurate budget 

and financial needs. The Director told us that he chose not to send a third EOIRwide communication to correct any inaccuracies in his previous communications 

because he experienced what he considered a “backlash” after sending the previous 

emails. 

We determined that EOIR erroneously estimated its yearly interpreter costs 

by extrapolating a single, unusually high monthly interpreter expense, which was 

not supported by invoices or other contemporaneous evidence. We further 

determined that this erroneous estimate adversely affected EOIR leadership’s 

communication of accurate budget needs to Department and congressional decision 

makers. Based on these findings, we recommend that EOIR: 

1. Work with JMD to: (a) develop a process to compile and monitor the status 

of interpreter contract obligations and (b) provide EOIR leadership, in 

coordination with its Office of Administration, the tools to acquire and access 

to real-time, accurate cost and spending estimates. 
17 

APPENDIX 1 

OBJECTIVE, SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY 

Objective 

The objective of this audit was to assess EOIR’s efforts to identify effectively 

its funding needs and execute its budget in light of issues that arose following 

EOIR’s receipt of its fiscal year (FY) 2019 appropriation. 

Scope and Methodology 

The scope of our audit covered Fiscal Year (FY) 2019, as well as the budget 

formulation phase that began 2 years prior in the spring of 2017. To achieve our 

audit objective, we interviewed several Department-level and component-specific 

budget officials and executives, including the EOIR Director, regarding how they set 

FY 2019 financial policies and procedures, reviewed documents pertaining to recent 

financial priorities and decisions, and toured EOIR office space in Falls Church, 

Virginia. 

We reviewed EOIR’s operational and financial planning for FY 2019, as well 

as policies and procedures related to budget formulation and execution. We also 

reviewed EOIR’s interpreter contract expenditures; its solicitation, acquisition, and 

payment interactions carried out with JMD; as well as policies and procedures 

related to invoice and obligation tracking. 

Statement on Compliance with Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards 

We conducted this performance audit in accordance with generally accepted 

government auditing standards (GAGAS). 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 on our audit objective. We 

believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and 

conclusions based on our audit objective. 

Internal Controls 

In this audit, we performed testing, as appropriate, of internal controls 

significant within the context of our audit objective. A deficiency in internal control 

design exists when a necessary control is missing or is not properly designed so 

that even if the control operates as designed, the control objective would not be 

met. A deficiency in implementation exists when a control is properly designed but 

not implemented correctly in the internal control system. A deficiency in operating 

effectiveness exists when a properly designed control does not operate as designed 
18 

or the person performing the control does not have the necessary competence or 

authority to perform the control effectively.20

As noted in the Audit Results section of this report, we identified deficiencies 

in EOIR’s internal controls that are significant within the context of the audit 

objective and based upon the audit work performed that we believe adversely affect 

EOIR’s ability to accurately and expediently ascertain its obligations and operating 

expenditures. We concluded that this deficiency creates the risk of EOIR operating 

under inaccurate and incorrect financial figures, which could impede its operations. 

Although we note this deficiency, we do not believe it is a material weakness. 

Computer-Processed Data 

During our audit, we obtained information from the Unified Financial 

Management System. We did not test the reliability of those systems as a whole, 

therefore any findings identified involving information from those systems were 

verified with documentation from other sources. 

20 Our evaluation of EOIR’s internal controls was not made for the purpose of providing 

assurance on its internal control structure as a whole. EOIR’s management is responsible for the 

establishment and maintenance of internal controls. Because we are not expressing an opinion on 

EOIR’s internal control structure as a whole, this statement is intended solely for the information and 

use of EOIR. This restriction is not intended to limit the distribution of this report, which is a matter of 

public record. 
19 

APPENDIX 2 

EOIR DIRECTOR’S FEBRUARY 2019 EMAIL 
20 

APPENDIX 3 

EOIR DIRECTOR’S MARCH 2019 EMAIL 
21 

23 

APPENDIX 5 

EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW’S RESPONSE 

TO THE DRAFT AUDIT REPORT 
24 
25 
26 

APPENDIX 6 

OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL ANALYSIS AND SUMMARY 

OF ACTIONS NECESSARY TO CLOSE THE REPORT 

The OIG provided a draft of this audit report to EOIR. We incorporated 

EOIR’s response in Appendix 5 of this final report. In response to our audit report, 

EOIR concurred with our recommendation and discussed the actions it has taken 

and plans to implement in response to our findings. As a result, the status of the 

audit report is resolved. The following provides the OIG analysis of the response 

and summary of the actions necessary to close the report. 

Recommendation for EOIR: 

1. Work with JMD to: (a) develop a process to compile and monitor the 

status of interpreter contract obligations and (b) provide EOIR 

leadership, in coordination with its Office of Administration, the tools 

to acquire and access to real-time, accurate cost and spending 

estimates. 

Resolved. EOIR concurred with our recommendation. Concerning subpart 

(a) of this recommendation, EOIR stated that it has updated internal 

processes in order to review invoices with more immediacy within the Office 

of Administration, Office of Budget and Financial Management. It stated that 

this change allows for more rapid and accurate involvement in determining 

actual outlays. Additionally, EOIR stated that it developed more robust 

processes for predicting future interpretation costs with greater accuracy, 

which informs regular data sharing efforts with JMD concerning costs, both 

those incurred and those expected in the future, surrounding the 

interpretation contract. Concerning subpart (b) of this recommendation, 

EOIR stated that its Office of Administration is in frequent communication 

with JMD and that sufficient reporting capabilities exist within the Unified 

Financial Management System to run queries as needed to analyze the data 

within this system. EOIR further stated that its Office of Administration 

offers quarterly briefings on the status of agency expenditures and 

obligations to its Acting Deputy Director, and is working closely with the 

agency Chief Management Officer, a new position within its Office of the 

Director, to craft future budget requests, as well as respond to questions 

from Congressional Appropriators and other interested and appropriate 

parties. 

Robust communication between EOIR and JMD, as well as within EOIR and its 

leadership, is essential for ensuring that agency priorities and critical 

operations are properly budgeted and accounted for. This recommendation 

can be closed when EOIR provides evidence of: (1) its collaboration with 

JMD regarding the monitoring and analysis of financial obligations, including 

documentation that ascertains whether JMD can improve UFMS’ reporting 

capabilities any further to suit EOIR’s financial monitoring needs, and (2) its 
27 

Office of Administration’s quarterly breifings detailing the status of agency 

expenditures and obligations to its Acting Deputy Director. 
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL

950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20530-0001

 

Also at Oversight.gov

The Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General (DOJ OIG) is a 

statutorily created independent entity whose mission is to detect and deter 

waste, fraud, abuse, and misconduct in the Department of Justice, and to 

promote economy and efficiency in the Department’s operations.

To report allegations of waste, fraud, abuse, or misconduct regarding DOJ 

programs, employees, contractors, grants, or contracts please visit or call the

DOJ OIG Hotline at oig.justice.gov/hotline or (800) 869-4499.

Website Twitter YouTube

oig.justice.gov @JusticeOIG JusticeOIG