a

GAO

United States Government Accountability Office

Report to the Chairman, Committee on 

Government Reform, House of 

Representatives

September 2004 BORDER SECURITY

State Department 

Rollout of Biometric 

Visas on Schedule, but 

Guidance Is Lagging

GAO-04-1001
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-04-1001.

To view the full product, including the scope 

and methodology, click on the link above. 

For more information, contact Jess Ford at 

(202) 512-4128 or fordj@gao.gov. 

Highlights of GAO-04-1001, a report to the 

Chairman, Committee on Government 

Reform, House of Representatives 

September 2004

BORDER SECURITY

State Department Rollout of Biometric 

Visas on Schedule, but Guidance Is 

Lagging 

As a complement to the 

Department of Homeland 

Security’s (DHS) United States 

Visitor and Immigrant Status 

Indicator Technology (US-VISIT) 

program—a governmentwide 

program to better control and 

monitor the entry, visa status, and 

exit of visitors—the State 

Department (State) is 

implementing the Biometric Visa 

Program at all 207 overseas 

consulates by October 26, 2004. 

This program, required by the 

Enhanced Border Security and Visa 

Entry Reform Act of 2002, requires 

that all persons applying for U.S. 

visas have certain biometrics 

(fingerprints) and a digital 

photograph collected during the 

visa application interview. This 

information must be cleared 

through the DHS Automated 

Biometric Identification System 

(IDENT) before an applicant can 

receive a visa. GAO reviewed 

State’s rollout of the program, 

including its implementation 

progress and how State and DHS 

envision the program being used to 

help adjudicate visas. 

GAO recommends that DHS and 

State develop and provide to 

consular posts guidance on how 

the program should be used to help 

adjudicate visas and that State 

direct each consular post to 

develop an implementation plan 

based on this guidance. 

DHS and State generally concurred 

with these recommendations. 

State is installing the equipment and software for the Biometric Visa 

Program on schedule and will likely meet the October 26, 2004, 

implementation deadline. However, DHS and State have not fully developed 

guidance for the program’s use. As of September 1, 2004, State had installed 

program hardware and software at 201 out of a total of 207 overseas posts 

and plans to complete the installation at the remaining 6 posts by September 

30. The posts with the program are now collecting fingerprints of each visa 

applicant and processing the prints through the DHS IDENT database. 

Although the technology installation has progressed smoothly, DHS and 

State have not developed and not provided comprehensive guidance that 

includes directions to consular officers on when in the visa process prints 

are to be scanned and when and how information from the IDENT database 

on visa applicants should be considered by consular officers. In the absence 

of such guidance, GAO found that consular officers are unclear on how to 

use the program and the information available from IDENT on visa 

applicants. For example, officers are unclear about whether fingerprints of 

visa applicants should be collected before or during the visa interview, 

whether information on visa applicants from the DHS database should be 

considered by the visa-adjudicating officer during or after the interview, and 

who should have responsibility for reviewing the IDENT information before 

visa issuance. Answers to these questions could significantly affect how each

post manages workflows and processes visa applicants, which could have 

staffing and resource implications. 

Example of Fingerprints and Photograph Capture 
Page i GAO-04-1001 Biometric Visa Program

Contents

Letter 1

Results in Brief 2

Background 3

Implementation Moving Forward, yet Guidance Is Lacking 6

Conclusions 14

Recommendations for Executive Action 15

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 15

Scope and Methodology 16

Appendixes

Appendix I: Comments from the Department of Homeland Security 18

GAO Comments 21

Appendix II: Comments from the Department of State 22

GAO Comments 28

Figures Figure 1: Biometric Fingerprint Analysis Process 5

Figure 2: Potential Timing of IDENT Response on Visa 

Applicants 11

Abbreviations

IDENT DHS Automated Biometric Identification System

INA U.S. Immigration and Nationality Act

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further 

permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or 

other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to 

reproduce this material separately.
Page 1 GAO-04-1001 Biometric Visa Program

United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, D.C. 20548

A

September 9, 2004 Letr

The Honorable Tom Davis

Chairman, Committee on Government Reform

House of Representatives

Since September 11, 2001, the U.S. government has made a concerted effort 

to strengthen border security by enhancing visa issuance policies and 

procedures, as well as improving screening of the millions of foreign 

visitors who enter the United States annually. A major initiative is the 

Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) United States Visitor and 

Immigrant Status Indicator Technology (US-VISIT) program—a 

governmentwide program to collect, maintain, and share information on 

foreign nationals and better control and monitor the entry, visa status, and 

exit of visitors. As a complement to US-VISIT, the State Department (State) 

is implementing the Biometric Visa Program at all 207 nonimmigrant visaissuing overseas consulates by October 26, 2004.1

 This program requires 

that all persons applying for U.S. visas have certain biometrics2

(fingerprints) and digital photographs collected during the visa application 

interview and cleared through the DHS Automated Biometric Identification 

System (IDENT) before receiving a visa. The program is also consistent 

with the 9/11 Commission report issued on July 22, 2004, that recommends 

using biometric identifiers for border and transportation systems and a 

biometric entry-exit screening system for travelers.

For this report, we assessed State’s implementation of the Biometric Visa 

Program for nonimmigrant visas,3

 including progress in installing 

equipment and software and how State and DHS envision the program 

should be used to help adjudicate visas. We obtained and reviewed State’s 

1

Section 303 of the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act of 2002 (Pub. L. 

No. 107-173) requires that no later than October 26, 2004, the State Department issue visas 

that use biometric identifiers.

2

Biometrics is a wide range of technologies that can be used to verify a person’s identity by 

measuring and analyzing his or her physiological characteristics. In this case, and for the 

purposes of this report, “biometric identifiers” refers to fingerprints. See GAO, Technology 

Assessment: Using Biometrics for Border Security, GAO-03-174 (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 14, 

2002). 

3

In this report, we use the term “visa” to refer to nonimmigrant visas only. The United States 

also grants visas to people who intend to immigrate to the United States. A visa allows a 

foreign visitor to present himself or herself at a port of entry for admission to the United 

States. 
Page 2 GAO-04-1001 Biometric Visa Program

guidance to consular posts, analyzed technical data, and interviewed 

officials from State and DHS about the Biometric Visa Program. We also 

visited consular posts in El Salvador and the Dominican Republic to 

observe the visa process under the new system. We conducted our review 

in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.

Results in Brief State is installing the equipment and software for the Biometric Visa 

Program on schedule and will likely meet the October 26, 2004, 

implementation deadline. However, DHS and State have not developed 

comprehensive guidance for the program’s use. As of September 1, 2004, 

State had installed program hardware and software at 201 out of a total of 

207 overseas posts and plans to complete the installation at the remaining 6 

posts by September 30. The posts with the program are now collecting 

fingerprints of each visa applicant and processing the prints through the 

DHS IDENT database. Although the technology installation has progressed 

smoothly, DHS and State have not developed and not provided 

comprehensive guidance to consular posts that includes directions to 

consular officers on when in the visa process prints are to be scanned and 

when and how information from the IDENT database on visa applicants 

should be considered by consular officers in adjudicating visas. In the 

absence of such guidance, we found that consular officers are unclear on 

how to use the program and the information available from IDENT on visa 

applicants. For example, officers are unclear about whether fingerprints of 

visa applicants should be collected before or during the visa interview, 

whether information on visa applicants from the DHS database should be 

considered by the visa-adjudicating officer during or after the interview, 

and who should have responsibility for reviewing the IDENT information 

before visa issuance. Answers to these questions could significantly affect 

how each post manages workflows and processes visa applicants, which 

could have staffing and resource implications.

Consular officers overseas need to know how the program’s information 

about visa applicants is intended to be used in order to maximize program 

effectiveness and determine optimal workflow management and resource 

issues. Therefore, we are recommending that the Secretaries of Homeland 

Security and State develop and provide to consular officers comprehensive 

guidance on how all aspects of the Biometric Visa Program should be used 

and that each consular post develop an implementation plan based on this 

guidance. 
Page 3 GAO-04-1001 Biometric Visa Program

In commenting on a draft of our report, DHS generally concurred, stating 

that GAO’s identification of areas where improvements are needed in the 

Biometric Visa Program will contribute to ongoing efforts to strengthen the 

visa process. State acknowledged that there may be a lag in guidance and 

that this may be inevitable given the rapid implementation of this program. 

Both departments noted that posts have been allowed flexibility in 

implementing the program based on potential staffing and facility 

limitations. Our recommendations provide a basis for DHS and State to 

address these potential limitations.

Background The multibillion dollar DHS US-VISIT program aims to improve the nation’s 

capacity for collecting information on foreign nationals who travel to the 

United States, as well as control the pre-entry, entry, status, and exit of 

these travelers. The goals of US-VISIT are to facilitate legitimate travel and 

trade and enhance national security. Under the program, most foreign 

visitors are required to submit to fingerprint scans of their right and left 

index finger and have a digital photograph taken upon arrival at U.S. ports 

of entry.4

As a complement to US-VISIT, State’s Biometric Visa Program, which is 

budgeted at more than $162 million through fiscal year 2005, is designed to 

deny U.S. visas to questionable travelers to stop them before they enter the 

country and to verify the identity of legitimate travelers who use visas to 

enter the United States. Under the program, consular officers collect visa 

applicants’ fingerprints and photographs at overseas posts to verify the 

identity of foreign nationals who plan to enter the United States. Then 

inspectors at U.S. ports of entry use State’s records to verify that the 

original visa applicant is, indeed, the person now entering the United States 

on that visa. According to the Assistant Secretary for Consular Affairs, the 

Biometric Visa Program will enhance the integrity of the U.S. visa process, 

better equipping the consular officers who are the nation’s “first line of 

defense.” DHS and State share responsibility for policy and implementation 

of the Biometric Visa Program. According to a Memorandum of 

4

US-VISIT is currently deployed at major U.S. seaports and airports and will eventually be 

deployed at land ports.
Page 4 GAO-04-1001 Biometric Visa Program

Understanding5 between the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security, 

DHS is responsible for establishing visa policy, reviewing implementation 

of the policy, and providing additional direction, while State is responsible 

for managing the visa process.

Fingerprinting Process In September 2003, the State Department began installing fingerprint 

scanners and related software at U.S. consulate posts abroad. Foreign 

nationals who apply for nonimmigrant visas at U.S. consulates with 

scanners are required to submit to a scan of their right and left index 

fingers. Once a print is captured, it is transmitted electronically from the 

consulate’s server6

 to State’s server. The State server then transmits the 

print to IDENT—a DHS database that includes some 5 million people who 

may be ineligible to receive a visa. Our review of State’s data on processing 

times indicates that transmitting the fingerprints from posts through State 

to DHS and receiving a response generally takes about 30 minutes. (See fig. 

1.)

5

Memorandum of Understanding Between the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security 

Concerning Implementation of Section 428 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, 

Sept. 30, 2003. 

6

A server is a computer on a network that manages network resources, such as storing files, 

managing printers, managing network traffic, or processing database queries.
Page 5 GAO-04-1001 Biometric Visa Program

Figure 1: Biometric Fingerprint Analysis Process

IDENT contains two sets of data: (1) “watch list” fingerprint records 

including immigration violators and a subset of the Federal Bureau of 

Investigation’s (FBI) fingerprint database containing records on terrorists 

and individuals with felony convictions7

 and (2) fingerprint and photograph 

records of persons previously entered into the system either at a U.S. port 

of entry or by applying at a U.S. consular post for a visa. IDENT searches 

for matches, triggering a response back to the consulate indicating a “hit” 

or no existing record (“N/R”). A hit means a person is on a watch list or that 

the person has been previously entered into the system. Then applicants 

with no previous IDENT records are entered into the system for future 

transactions. If the system cannot determine whether the applicant’s prints 

match a set previously entered, the system sends the data to biometric 

Post server

State Department

server

Sources: GAO analysis of State and DHS processes.

DHS Server: IDENT analysis

If needed, prints

are analyzed by

a fingerprint

expert.

IDENT response

reviewed before

visa printed 

Fingerprint

capture at post 

Total time: 30 minutes

15 minutes

Up to 24 hours

30 seconds

7

IDENT data includes FBI information on all known and suspected terrorists, selected 

wanted persons (foreign-born, unknown place of birth, previously arrested by DHS), and 

previous criminal histories for high risk countries; DHS Immigration and Customs 

Enforcement information on deported felons and sexual registrants; and DHS information 

on previous criminal histories. Information from the bureau includes fingerprints from the 

Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System.
Page 6 GAO-04-1001 Biometric Visa Program

experts to determine if a subject’s print has a match or that there is no 

record in the system.8

 These responses are sent back to the DHS IDENT 

database and then routed to consulates through the State server. If an 

IDENT hit response is returned on a visa applicant, the consulate’s 

software will not allow a visa to be printed unless it is reviewed and cleared 

by a consular officer. 

Implementation 

Moving Forward, yet 

Guidance Is Lacking

State’s implementation of the technology aspects of the biometric visa 

program is currently on schedule to meet the October 26, 2004, deadline. A 

well-planned rollout of equipment and software and fewer technical 

problems than anticipated have contributed to smooth implementation of 

the technological aspects of the program at the 201 posts that had the 

program operating as of September 1. But amid the fast pace in rolling out 

the program to meet the deadline, DHS and State have neither developed 

comprehensive guidance for the program, including determining who 

should scan fingerprints, where and who should review information about 

applicants returned from IDENT, and technical requirements for the IDENT 

system, nor provided comprehensive guidance for consular posts on how 

the information about visa applicants made available through the Biometric 

Visa Program should be used to help adjudicate visas.

State Is Expected to Meet 

the Legislative Deadline

State planned the rollout of the equipment (hardware and software) to take 

advantage of already-scheduled contractor upgrades to software and 

hardware at many of the overseas posts,9

 thereby decreasing the overall 

burden on the posts and managing the costs of the program. The program’s 

funding was included in the department’s appropriation—nearly $54 

million for fiscal years 2003 and 2004—and is projected at more than $108 

million for fiscal year 2005. In addition, State arranged for additional 

installation teams to be deployed as needed to avoid potential delays in the 

implementation schedule for posts. 

Overall, implementation of the technological aspects of the Biometric Visa 

Program is on schedule. According to State officials at headquarters and at 

8

One in 1,000 cases require examination by a fingerprint expert, according to State officials.

9

On a revolving 24- to 36-month schedule, State replaces hardware and upgrades or installs 

software at the consular posts. Where possible, State added the installation of the 

fingerprint capture software and the fingerprint scanners to these scheduled visits. 
Page 7 GAO-04-1001 Biometric Visa Program

the two posts we visited, State has experienced fewer technical problems 

than anticipated. Early on, State had a few difficulties in transmitting data 

between the posts and the DHS IDENT, primarily related to server and 

firewall (computer security) issues. According to State, most issues were 

resolved within a few days. 

Fingerprinting Raising Issues in 

Visa Process

According to State, the time required to collect fingerprints has not 

significantly affected interview times. State officials estimate that it can 

take as little as a few seconds to collect prints, and the average time is 

about 30 seconds. In San Salvador, El Salvador, and Santo Domingo, 

Dominican Republic, we observed that capturing prints for some 

applicants fell within these time frames but, in some cases, the fingerprint 

collection times were significantly longer. In one case, it took more than 10 

minutes for an elderly woman to understand the interviewing officer’s 

verbal instructions on where to place her finger so that the prints could be 

captured. For security reasons, interviewing officers are separated by a 

glass window from the applicants. As a result, they can only give verbal 

instructions or hold up a finger to demonstrate which one to use, and they 

cannot physically touch an applicant’s finger to position it correctly on the 

scanner. 

According to State’s data, from February to August 2004, the total biometric 

visa process averaged about 30 minutes for an applicant’s prints to be sent 

from an overseas post to the State server, then on to DHS for IDENT 

analysis, and then for the response to be returned through State’s server to 

the post. To date, the analysis time required by the IDENT database to 

search for a match to an applicant’s prints has fallen within the time frame 

agreed to by State and DHS—within 15 minutes if no human analysis is 

required.10 If human analysis is required, DHS has up to 24 hours to provide 

a response back to the post. 

Our observations at posts in San Salvador and Santo Domingo 

demonstrated the importance of the length of the time required to receive 

an IDENT response. We observed that most interviews average only a few 

minutes, but the IDENT response time currently is 30 minutes. Thus, if 

10State officials told us that DHS and State have an informal arrangement that the response 

time must be within 15 minutes for IDENT analysis or, if biometric experts must examine 

the prints, up to 24 hours. The officials said that State and DHS are formalizing this 

agreement in a memorandum of understanding. 
Page 8 GAO-04-1001 Biometric Visa Program

interviewing officers collect prints during interviews, the IDENT responses 

will not be available to these consular officers by the end of the interviews. 

IDENT response time could potentially affect visa issuance times because a 

visa cannot be issued to an applicant until the post has received the IDENT 

response on the person. Long delays in the IDENT response times could 

have a major effect on the visa issuance process and inconvenience visa 

applicants. Consular Affairs has encouraged officials to issue visas the day 

after interviews since part of the visa process now relies on another 

agency’s system. However, some posts still issue same-day visas, such as 

Santo Domingo.

Implementation Continues at 

Largest-Volume Posts

While the IDENT database response times have not adversely affected visa 

processes to date, officials remain cautious about the potential for IDENT 

database capacity issues and longer response times as the large-volume 

posts are added to the program. State began the program’s rollout at smalland medium-sized posts to work out potential problems before deploying it 

at posts with the largest applicant volumes. As of September 1, 2004, 201 of 

the 207, or 97 percent, of the visa issuance posts have implemented the 

program. In terms of nonimmigrant visa application volume, this number 

represents about 89 percent of the total worldwide volume. Taipei, Taiwan; 

and Manila, Philippines; are the last “extra-large volume” visa issuing posts 

that are scheduled to become operational in the program in midSeptember.

DHS and State are closely monitoring the IDENT response times as the 

final 6 consular posts—representing 11 percent of the worldwide visa 

application volume—are added to the program. Increased volumes of visa 

applications combined with the increased volume of entrants at U.S. ports 

of entry due to summer tourism could potentially affect the speed of 

IDENT’s response. In addition, IDENT processing may be further affected 

by the September 30, 2004, requirement that the database system analyze 

fingerprint records for all visitors from countries in the Visa Waiver 

Program11 at U.S. ports of entry. 

11Under the Visa Waiver Program, citizens of 27 countries are not required to obtain visas for 

business or pleasure stays of short duration.
Page 9 GAO-04-1001 Biometric Visa Program

Overall Impact of IDENT 

Responses on Visa Decisions Is 

Low

According to State, the overall impact of IDENT responses on visa issuance 

decisions has been relatively low to date, primarily due to the program’s 

infancy. According to State officials, nearly 1.7 million sets of visa applicant 

prints had been processed by August 19, 2004, and of those, 1,197 were 

identified as watch list hits—having derogatory criminal or immigration 

information on file. At the two posts we visited, nine applicant records 

were returned as watch list hits between February and May 2004. The 

adjudicating officers had already refused eight of the applicants on other 

grounds12 during their interviews; one applicant’s visa had been 

preliminarily approved by the interviewing officer pending review of the 

IDENT response, but then due to the derogatory information IDENT 

returned, the visa was not issued. 

Guidance Lagging behind 

Implementation

Due to the rapid deployment of the hardware and software technology to 

meet the required deadline, comprehensive guidance on using the 

Biometric Visa Program and the information available through IDENT has 

lagged behind implementation. State and DHS have yet to agree on the 

details of how all aspects of the program will be used, including 

determining who should scan fingerprints, where and who should review 

information about applicants returned from IDENT, and technical 

requirements for the IDENT system, and have not provided comprehensive 

guidance for consular posts on how the information about visa applicants 

made available through the Biometric Visa Program should be used to help 

adjudicate visas. State consular officers using IDENT face a range of issues 

without such guidance, including the following:

• Workflow management: the time, place, and person responsible for 

collecting fingerprints and reviewing IDENT responses on applicants. At 

some posts, staff other than the interviewing officer take the 

fingerprints of visa applicants, but some interviewing officers told us 

that they prefer to take prints from those that they interview to ensure 

accountability. While Santo Domingo has designated a window to scan 

applicants’ prints prior to the interview, sometimes that window may be 

needed for interviews during heavy volume. Both San Salvador and 

12The most common reason for denial of a visa is that the applicant intends to come to the 

United States and remain. Section 214(b) of the U.S. Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) 

presumes that every alien (other than a nonimmigrant) is an immigrant until he or she 

establishes eligibility for nonimmigrant status under the INA. See 8 U.S.C. §1184(b) and 8 

U.S.C. §1101(a)(15).
Page 10 GAO-04-1001 Biometric Visa Program

Santo Domingo have designated an officer to review and clear all hit 

information on applicants, so some interviewing officers do not look at 

IDENT responses for those they interview. 

• Information availability: the information available to the consular 

officers and how easily it can be accessed. We observed that a line on 

the interviewers’ computer screens notified them with a “Hit” or “N/R” 

when information on an applicant was returned from IDENT. The 

officers open a screen that displays IDENT information to learn more 

about the hit—for example, was it a previous entry into the United 

States where prints and photograph were taken or derogatory criminal 

information? While the former might corroborate an applicant’s story, 

the latter may indicate grounds for refusing a visa.

• System requirements: the IDENT turnaround time necessary to ensure 

timely visa issuance. For example, if a designated officer will review all 

the IDENT information, and posts are no longer issuing same-day visas, 

an IDENT response time of up to a few hours may be acceptable.

Because they lack specific guidance on the system’s use, consular officers 

at overseas posts are unclear as to how they should implement the 

Biometric Visa Program and are currently using the returned IDENT 

responses in nonuniform ways. For example, we found that, in cases where 

the IDENT response information is available to the overseas post by the 

time of the interview, some consular officers review information before the 

interview, some review it during the interview, and some do not review it at 

all, relying on a designated officer or the line chief to review the 

information after the interview is completed and before affected visas are 

printed. (See fig. 2.) One State official noted that key information about an 

applicant could be overlooked if the interviewing officer was not the same 

officer who reviews the IDENT information, such as the timing and 

frequency of prior visits to the United States. 
Page 11 GAO-04-1001 Biometric Visa Program

Figure 2: Potential Timing of IDENT Response on Visa Applicants

Enterprise Architecture Program 

Design Lacking for US-VISIT

In September 2003, we identified the US-VISIT program as a high-risk 

endeavor.13 We reported that an operation such as US-VISIT requires an 

operational context—or “enterprise architecture”—that is, a program 

design that sets out the key program decisions, such as what functions are 

to be performed and by whom, when and where they are to be performed, 

what information is to be used to perform them, and what rules and 

standards will govern the application of technology to support them. In the 

absence of an enterprise architecture, certain policy and standards 

information necessary to effectively define, establish, and implement the 

US-VISIT program was not available.

In the same report, we recommended that DHS establish an advisory board 

comprising representatives from key US-VISIT federal stakeholder 

organizations that would oversee US-VISIT management including overall 

Data entry

& photo

scan 

Fingerprint

scan Interview

Fingerprint

scan and 

interview at

the same time 

Print

visa 

Potential points for review of IDENT

response on applicant 

Source: GAO analysis of State consular process. 

13See GAO, Homeland Security: Risks Facing Key Border and Transportation Security 

Program Need to Be Addressed, GAO-03-1083 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 19, 2003).
Page 12 GAO-04-1001 Biometric Visa Program

vision and strategic direction. This board was created and has been 

operational since January 26, 2004, but has not yet provided stakeholder 

agencies with a clearly defined vision and operational context for the 

various components under US-VISIT. For example, DHS awarded a 

contract in June that includes developing a detailed Program Plan for USVISIT that would focus on such areas as business functionality, information 

technology strategy, facilities strategy, and implementation. State officials 

indicated that they are waiting for DHS to articulate its vision on these 

areas, which would guide further State actions on the Biometric Visa 

Program. 

In our current review, we found that the lack of a clear enterprise 

architecture, or operational context, for US-VISIT affects State’s Biometric 

Visa Program, which, although administered by State, falls under the 

overall visa policy area of the DHS Directorate of Border and 

Transportation Security. In the absence of a cohesive vision defined by 

DHS and State for using the information available through the Biometric 

Visa Program, State will have difficulty providing guidance and technical 

requirements for IDENT response time and determining optimal workflow 

processes to enable users to maximize the program’s effectiveness.

In May 2004, we reported14 that designing, developing, and implementing a 

biometrics program requires consideration of factors such as how the 

technology will be used, cost-benefit analysis, trade-offs between the 

increased security that the use of biometrics would provide, and the effect 

on areas such as privacy and convenience. For a biometric security 

program, the high-level goals of the program need to be defined, and the 

concept of operations that will embody the people, process, and 

technologies required to achieve these goals needs to be developed.

Potential Program Uses and 

Related Issues

The Biometric Visa Program has the potential to be a powerful tool for 

protecting the nation’s borders, while facilitating legitimate travel to the 

United States. The program can enhance the integrity of U.S. visas, provide 

a “safety net” for consular officers to ensure that they catch individuals 

who have been watchlisted, and equip consular posts as “forward based 

defense.” However, there is no comprehensive guidance that articulates the 

program’s many potential uses and provides guidance to consular officers 

on how best to implement them. 

14GAO, Aviation Security: Challenges in Using Biometric Technologies, GAO-04-785T

(Washington, D.C.: May 19, 2004). 
Page 13 GAO-04-1001 Biometric Visa Program

• Through the collection of fingerprints at consular posts and their 

transmission to IDENT, the program ensures that biometric data on all 

visa applicants becomes part of the DHS US-VISIT database. According 

to State and DHS, this process enhances the integrity of U.S. visas by 

ensuring that the same person who applies for a visa is the one who 

enters the United States using that visa.15 In May 2004, GAO reported16

that biometric programs depend on accurate processes for the initial 

collection and verification of applicants’ identities and biometrics. To 

date, however, State has not clarified guidance for important aspects of 

scanning fingerprints. The interviewing officers in San Salvador noted 

that assisting applicants to understand the fingerprinting process (for 

example, how to place their fingers on the scanners) sometimes led 

them to give the applicants more time in their interviews than 

previously. In addition, some officers noted that the mechanics of taking 

the prints interrupted the flow of the interview, and officers lost some of 

the key first impressions that helped them make adjudication decisions. 

Some felt that having someone beside the interviewing officer collect 

the prints helped to speed the process and enable interviewing officers 

to conduct the interviews.

• The program can also provide a “safety net” for visa decisions to catch 

those on the watch list. State is already using the program in this way, as 

noted earlier, in the case where the interviewing officer initially 

approved an applicant for a visa, but the visa was not issued when 

IDENT returned derogatory information. State does not have a specific 

category designated for refusing visas due to derogatory information 

returned by IDENT and, therefore, State could not provide data on the 

total number of such refusals. Many of the 18 adjudicating officers we 

interviewed at the consular posts in San Salvador and Santo Domingo 

indicated that they liked having the information available from the 

IDENT database, which may have additional information on potential 

immigration violations or criminal records that they can review prior to 

visa issuance.

15DHS currently does not have information on individuals apprehended at ports of entry 

when their prints and photographs did not match those captured at the consular posts for 

the visa they were using. On July 19, 2004, DHS implemented a system to assist in identifying 

such cases and will have better information in the future. 

16GAO-04-785T.
Page 14 GAO-04-1001 Biometric Visa Program

• The program has the potential to equip consular posts as “forward based 

defense” to prevent potential terrorists and problematic or other 

questionable travelers from entering the United States. Along with the 

watch list information, the response from the DHS IDENT database also 

includes information on travelers’ entries to the United States that have 

been obtained by the US-VISIT program at major seaports and land 

ports, including photographs, fingerprint records, and date and time of 

each entry. This information can establish an applicant’s travel patterns, 

which could help to inform interviewing officers. For example, in San 

Salvador we observed that the IDENT record on one applicant showed 

that she had entered the United States a number of times over the past 

several months. Since we had observed the interviewing throughout the 

day, we knew that this woman was a flight attendant, and the IDENT 

record corroborated her story. However, the officer who reviewed her 

IDENT record was not the same one who interviewed her earlier in the 

day, so the information meant little to him, but he cleared her visa for 

issuance regardless. According to State, consular officers are trained to 

use the best information available to them to make the best decision as 

early as possible in the information chain, but interviewing officers are 

not currently required to review applicants’ IDENT information. Had the 

interviewing officer reviewed this applicant’s IDENT response, he or she 

would have seen the US-VISIT photographs of the applicant in her 

uniform, verifying both her identity and her legitimate need for a visa. 

According to a senior State official, the department envisions that as the 

program matures, the information it provides on visa applicants may prove 

increasingly useful for adjudicating officers. However, he acknowledged 

that the department’s current focus is compliance with the legislated 

requirement to implement the Biometric Visa Program by October 26, 2004; 

as a result, State has not fully developed policies and guidance in advance 

of the program’s implementation. 

Conclusions At the cost of some $162 million, the new Biometric Visa Program coupled 

with the DHS US-VISIT program has, according to State, improved the 

integrity of the visa process and has potential to better identify visa 

applicants and travelers of concern to U.S. law enforcement, while also 

facilitating travel by legitimate travelers. Although State’s rollout of the 

technology aspects of the Biometric Visa Program has exceeded 

expectations regarding schedule and technical issues, the lag in guidance 

has resulted in consular officers at overseas posts being unclear as to how 

they are to use the available IDENT information on applicants. In the 
Page 15 GAO-04-1001 Biometric Visa Program

absence of guidance on how the information available through the program 

is to be used, consular posts are not able to identify optimal workflow 

arrangements, facility setup, and staffing issues that may be necessary for 

interviewing officers to make visa decisions and to process visas efficiently 

and effectively. We raise these issues so that facility and resource issues 

can be better addressed as the program is implemented. 

Recommendations for 

Executive Action

GAO is making two recommendations in this report:

• We recommend that the Secretaries of Homeland Security and State 

develop and provide comprehensive guidance to consular posts that 

includes direction to consular officers on how to best implement the 

Biometric Visa Program. The guidance should address the planned uses 

for the Biometric Visa Program at consular posts including directions to 

consular officers on when in the visa process prints are to be scanned 

and when and how information from the IDENT database on visa 

applicants should be considered by consular officers during their 

interviews. In developing the guidance, State and DHS should consider 

factors such as program security goals, resources in terms of personnel 

and costs, response times, and the burden on the applicant. 

• We also recommend that the Secretary of State direct each consular 

post to develop an implementation plan based on this guidance. 

Agency Comments and 

Our Evaluation

We provided a draft of this report to the Departments of Homeland Security 

and State for their comment. Their comments, along with our responses to 

specific points, are reprinted in appendixes I and II, respectively.

The Department of Homeland Security said that it generally concurred with 

the report and our recommendations and that GAO’s identification of areas 

where improvements are needed in the Biometric Visa Program will 

contribute to ongoing efforts to strengthen the visa process. The State 

Department acknowledged that there may be a lag in guidance and that this 

may be inevitable given the rapid implementation of this program. Both 

departments noted that the consular posts have been permitted flexibility 

in implementing the program to account for personnel and facility 

limitations. While we understand these resource concerns, we believe it is 

important that the departments reach agreement and provide guidance to 

consular posts on how information made available to consular posts 
Page 16 GAO-04-1001 Biometric Visa Program

through the Biometric Visa Program is intended to be used to help consular 

officers adjudicate visas. With this guidance, consular posts would be able 

to better assess personnel and facility constraints and develop specific 

plans to better implement the program, including requesting additional 

resources if necessary. In addition, both departments provided further 

information on what they have done to implement the program and its 

accomplishments. 

Scope and 

Methodology

To assess State’s implementation of the Biometric Visa Program for 

nonimmigrant visas, including the program’s progress and how State plans 

to use it, we interviewed State officials and reviewed their schedule for 

rollout. We also visited the DHS Biometric Support Center to observe the 

fingerprint expert backup for IDENT analysis and interviewed DHS 

officials on their roles in support of State’s visa program. We obtained data 

from State and DHS on IDENT response times and reviewed State’s 

methodology for collecting and reporting this information. We determined 

that the data reliability was sufficient for our reporting purposes. We 

performed fieldwork at consular posts in San Salvador, El Salvador, and 

Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic. According to State, these two highvolume posts process visa applicants from both rural and urban 

populations—a classification that represents extremes in the visa applicant 

pool better than variation across world geographic regions. We observed 

the visa process incorporating the collection of biometric fingerprints, 

review of IDENT response information, and clearance of hits for visa 

printing. We conducted our work between April and August 2004 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.

We are sending copies of this report to interested Members of Congress, 

the Secretary of State, and the Secretary of Homeland Security. We also will 

make copies available to others upon request. In addition, the report will be 

available at no charge on the GAO Web site at http://www.gao.gov.
Page 17 GAO-04-1001 Biometric Visa Program

If you or your staff has any questions concerning this report, please contact 

me at (202) 512-4128 or at fordj@gao.gov. Key contributors to this report 

were John Brummet, Sharron Candon, Jeanette Espínola, Jon Fremont, 

Janey Cohen, and Martin de Alteriis.

Jess T. Ford

Director, International Affairs and Trade
Page 18 GAO-04-1001 Biometric Visa Program

Appendix I

Comments from the Department of Homeland Apendxies

Security ApendxiI

Note: GAO comments 

supplementing those in 

the report text appear 

at the end of this 

appendix.

See comment 1.

See comment 2.
Appendix I

Comments from the Department of Homeland 

Security

Page 19 GAO-04-1001 Biometric Visa Program
Appendix I

Comments from the Department of Homeland 

Security

Page 20 GAO-04-1001 Biometric Visa Program
Appendix I

Comments from the Department of Homeland 

Security

Page 21 GAO-04-1001 Biometric Visa Program

The following are GAO’s comments on the Department of Homeland 

Security’s letter dated August 24, 2004.

GAO Comments 1. We adjusted our wording throughout the report to clarify that our 

observations and recommendations are focused on the need for 

comprehensive guidance on how information available through the 

program is to be used by consular officers and not on the overall policy 

framework for US-VISIT and the Biometric Visa Program. 

2. While we understand posts’ resource concerns, we believe it is 

important that the departments reach agreement and provide guidance 

to consular posts on how information on applicants that is available 

through the Biometric Visa Program is intended to be used to help 

consular officers adjudicate visas. With this guidance, consular posts 

would be able to better assess personnel and facility constraints and 

develop specific plans to better implement the program, including 

requesting additional resources if necessary. 
Page 22 GAO-04-1001 Biometric Visa Program

Appendix II

Comments from the Department of State ApendxiI

Note: GAO comments 

supplementing those in 

the report text appear 

at the end of this 

appendix.
Appendix II

Comments from the Department of State

Page 23 GAO-04-1001 Biometric Visa Program

See comment 1.
Appendix II

Comments from the Department of State

Page 24 GAO-04-1001 Biometric Visa Program

See comment 2.

See comment 1.

See comment 3.
Appendix II

Comments from the Department of State

Page 25 GAO-04-1001 Biometric Visa Program

See comment 2.
Appendix II

Comments from the Department of State

Page 26 GAO-04-1001 Biometric Visa Program

See comment 2.

See comment 3.
Appendix II

Comments from the Department of State

Page 27 GAO-04-1001 Biometric Visa Program
Appendix II

Comments from the Department of State

Page 28 GAO-04-1001 Biometric Visa Program

The following are GAO’s comments on the Department of State’s letter 

dated August 18, 2004.

GAO Comments 1. We adjusted our wording throughout the report to clarify that our 

observations and recommendations are focused on the need for 

comprehensive guidance on how information available through the 

program is to be used by consular officers and not on the overall policy 

framework for US-VISIT and the Biometric Visa Program.

2. State has provided some guidance telegrams to posts over the course of 

the implementation of the Biometric Visa Program, including two 

telegrams sent to posts in July following GAO fieldwork at two 

overseas consular posts in May. The telegrams include guidance on 

such areas as moving away from same-day visa issuance toward mail or 

courier visa delivery to applicants, how to fix potential 

misidentifications for applicants’ fingerprints, and clarifications on FBI 

information available in watch list IDENT returns. However, these 

telegrams do not include guidance on certain key items we have 

identified, for example (1) how data on applicants’ travel patterns 

and/or previous enrollment in the database should be considered by 

adjudicating officers and (2) who should review and clear information 

returned from IDENT on applicants prior to visa issuance. Guidance on 

such issues could help set parameters for consular posts to most 

effectively implement the program and help them identify resource or 

facility constraints that might impair the program’s full and effective 

implementation. 

3. While we understand posts’ resource concerns, we believe it is 

important that the departments reach agreement and provide guidance 

to consular posts on how information on applicants that is available 

through the Biometric Visa Program is intended to be used to help 

consular officers adjudicate visas. With this guidance, consular posts 

would be able to better assess personnel and facility constraints and 

develop specific plans to better implement the program, including 

requesting additional resources if necessary. 

(320268)
GAO’s Mission The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; 

and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help 

Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s 

commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability.

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost 

is through GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts 

newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To 

have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go to 

www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to Updates.”

Order by Mail or Phone The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. 

A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of 

Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 

more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders 

should be sent to:

U.S. Government Accountability Office

441 G Street NW, Room LM

Washington, D.C. 20548

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Contact:

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Congressional 

Relations

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 

Washington, D.C. 20548

Public Affairs Jeff Nelligan, Managing Director, NelliganJ@gao.gov (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548
United States

Government Accountability Office

Washington, D.C. 20548-0001

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300

Address Service Requested

Presorted Standard

Postage & Fees Paid

GAO

Permit No. GI00