ICE Field Offices Need to 

Improve Compliance with 

Oversight Requirements 

for Segregation of 

Detainees with Mental 

Health Conditions 

September 29, 2017 

OIG-17-119 
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

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

September 29


MEMORANDUM FOR: Thomas D. Homan 

Acting Director 

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement 

FROM: John Roth 

Inspector General 

SUBJECT:	 ICE Field Offices Need to Improve Compliance with 

Oversight Requirements for Segregation of Detainees 

with Mental Health Conditions 

For your action is our final report, ICE Field Offices Need to Improve Compliance 

with Oversight Requirements for Segregation of Detainees with Mental Health 

Conditions. We incorporated the formal comments provided by your office. 

The report contains three recommendations aimed at improving oversight and 

accountability for segregation of detainees with mental health conditions. Your 

office concurred with all three recommendations. Based on information 

provided in your response to the draft report, we consider recommendations 1 

and 2 open and resolved. Once your office has fully implemented the 

recommendations, please submit a formal closeout letter to us within 30 days 

so that we may close the recommendations. The memorandum should be 

accompanied by evidence of completion of agreed-upon corrective actions and 

of the disposition of any monetary amounts. Recommendation 3 is resolved and 

closed. 

Please send your response or closure request to 

OIGInspectionsFollowup@oig.dhs.gov. 

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

provide copies of our report to congressional committees with oversight and 

appropriation responsibility over the Department of Homeland Security. We will 

post the report on our website for public dissemination. 

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

Jennifer L. Costello, Assistant Inspector General for Inspections and 

Evaluations or Angela Garvin, Deputy Assistant Inspector General for 

Inspections and Evaluations, at (202) 254-4100. 

www.oig.dhs.gov	 OIG-17-
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DHS OIG HIGHLIGHTS
 ICE Field Offices Need to Improve Compliance with 

Oversight Requirements for Segregation of

Detainees with Mental Health Conditions
 

September 29, 2017 

Why We Did 

This Review 

U.S. Immigration and 

Customs Enforcement (ICE) 

oversees the segregation of 

detainees from detention 

facilities’ general 

population. In this review of 

seven detention facilities, 

we sought to determine 

whether, for detainees with 

mental health conditions: 

(1) facility personnel follow 

ICE guidance for 

documenting segregation 

decisions; (2) facilities 

report segregation data 

accurately and promptly; 

and (3) ICE field offices 

follow procedures for 

reviewing segregation. 

What We 

Recommend 

We are making three 

recommendations to ICE to 

improve oversight and 

accountability for 

segregation of detainees 

with mental health 

conditions. 

For Further Information: 

Contact our Office of Public Affairs at 

(202) 254-4100, or email us at 

DHS-OIG.OfficePublicAffairs@oig.dhs.gov 

What We Found 

Through review of a sample of ICE segregation data and 

visits to seven facilities ICE uses to detain aliens held in 

Government custody, we determined that the seven detention 

facilities were generally following ICE guidance for 

documenting decisions on segregating detainees with mental 

health conditions. The detention facilities were also promptly 

reporting segregation placement information for detainees 

with mental health conditions to ICE field offices. However, 

the ICE field offices we reviewed did not record and promptly 

report all instances of segregation to ICE headquarters, nor 

did their system properly reflect all required reviews of 

ongoing segregation cases per ICE guidance. In addition, ICE 

does not regularly compare segregation data in the electronic 

management system with information at detention facilities 

to assess the accuracy and reliability of data in the system. 

ICE field office review and reporting of segregation of 

individual detainees with mental health conditions is 

important to ensuring the protection of detainees and facility 

staff, providing the best alternative for detainees with mental 

health conditions, and mitigating the risk of deterioration in 

detainees’ mental health. Unless ICE field offices comply with 

requirements to report and record these reviews, ICE 

headquarters cannot be sure required reviews are taking 

place and may not have all the information needed to assess 

the use of segregation, which could put detainees and facility 

staff at risk of harm. 

ICE Response 

ICE concurred with all our recommendations and described 

corrective actions it has taken and plans to take. We 

consider recommendations 1 and 2 resolved and open and 

recommendation 3 closed. 

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

Department of Homeland Security 

Background
 

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) apprehends, detains, and 

removes aliens who are in the United States unlawfully. ICE’s Enforcement and 

Removal Operations (ERO) conducts its enforcement and removal efforts 

through 24 national field offices, which report to ERO’s Domestic Operations 

Division at ICE headquarters. As part of its efforts, ERO places apprehended 

aliens who require custodial supervision in detention facilities. ICE tasks Field 

Office Directors (FOD) at ERO’s national field offices with ensuring that all 

detention facilities in their areas of responsibility comply with applicable 

detention standards and policies on the appropriate use of segregation. 

ICE uses three types of detention facilities: 

x Service processing centers – owned by ICE and staffed with Federal and 

contract employees 

x Contract detention facilities – owned and operated by private companies 

under contract with ICE 

x Intergovernmental Service Agreement (IGSA) facilities – state and local 

jails operating under an agreement with ICE 

Detention facility staff members sometimes segregate detainees from the 

detention facility’s general population. Historically, segregation has been called 

“solitary confinement,” but ICE uses “special management units” to mean 

segregation in which detainees are separated from general population and 

housed by themselves in individual cells. Although separated from other 

detainees, detainees in segregation are permitted daily contact with detention 

and medical staff, as well as time for recreation, library, and religious activities. 

In this report, we use the term segregation to describe ICE’s special 

management units. 

Detention facilities use two types of segregation: disciplinary, which is punitive, 

and administrative, which is non-punitive. According to ICE detention 

standards, disciplinary segregation is authorized only pursuant to an order 

from a facility disciplinary panel, following a hearing for detainees who violate 

facility rules. Administrative segregation is authorized by supervisory detention 

officials only as necessary to ensure the safety of the detainee, facility staff, or 

other detainees; protection of property; or orderly operation of the facility. 

According to ICE detention standards, when a detainee is admitted into either 

disciplinary or administrative segregation, medical personnel must be 

immediately informed and they must assess and review the detainee’s medical 

and mental health status and care needs. At 21 of the approximately 230 

www.oig.dhs.gov 2 OIG-17-
 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

detention facilities nationwide, the ICE Health Service Corps (IHSC) directly 

provides medical and mental health care for detainees. Detention facilities 

without IHSC personnel employ their own staff or contract with local 

practitioners to provide mental health care. 

On September 4, 2013, ICE published Directive 11065.1, Review of the Use of 

Segregation for ICE Detainees (ICE directive), which specifies ICE staff 

responsibilities for placement, review, and notification about segregation of all 

detainees, including detainees with “special vulnerabilities,” such as those with 

a mental health condition.1 Our review focused on a judgmental sample of 188 

placements in administrative or disciplinary segregation, from October 1, 2015, 

to June 30, 2016, for 127 detainees with mental health conditions.2 

According to the ICE directive, when a detainee with a special vulnerability, 

including a mental health condition, is placed in segregation for any length of 

time, the detention facility must notify the appropriate FOD as soon as possible 

but no later than 72 hours after the initial placement into segregation. Upon 

notification, the FOD is to immediately notify ERO’s Custody Management 

Division (CMD) at ICE headquarters about the placement. The ICE directive 

also requires detention facilities to notify FODs whenever any detainee, 

including one with a mental health condition, has been held continuously in 

segregation for 14 days, 30 days, and at every 30-day interval thereafter, or has 

been held in segregation for 14 days out of any 21-day period. Upon 

notification by the detention facility, FODs must review these cases of 

continued segregation to assess their appropriateness, based on applicable 

detention standards and policies. 

ERO field offices and ICE headquarters use the Segregation Review 

Management System (SRMS), a centralized web-based system, to document, 

track, and facilitate review of all segregation cases. According to SRMS 

guidance, ERO field office staff, including FODs, must use SRMS to report 

segregation placement data that falls under the ICE directive’s reporting 

requirements. 

1 In addition to those with mental health conditions, according to the ICE directive, detainees 

with special vulnerabilities are those with a serious medical illness; those who have a 

disability; who are elderly, pregnant, or nursing; who would be susceptible to harm in the 

general population due in part to their sexual orientation or gender identity; or who have been 

victims of sexual assault, torture, trafficking, or abuse. 

2 Appendix B contains details on the objectives, scope, and methodology of our review. 

www.oig.dhs.gov 3 OIG-17-
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Once a FOD notifies CMD about a segregation placement, CMD is to notify 

other ICE stakeholders, including headquarters’ Domestic Operations Division, 

Office of Detention Policy and Planning, and IHSC. ICE headquarters’ offices 

use data from SRMS to jointly review and evaluate the appropriateness of 

segregation and coordinate recommendations for alternatives to segregation. 

ICE headquarters also convenes weekly meetings of a multidisciplinary team, 

including representatives from IHSC, Domestic Operations Division, Office of 

the Principal Legal Advisor, and Office of Detention Policy and Planning. In 

these meetings, the team oversees and reviews facility segregation decisions by 

using data from SRMS to assess segregation placements of individual detainees 

with mental health conditions. 

Results of Review 

Through file review, interviews, and observation at the detention facilities, we 

determined that, in general, facility staff were following ICE guidance for 

documenting segregation placements of detainees with mental health 

conditions. For the 188 instances of segregation we reviewed, documentation at 

the facilities showed that, as required, the facilities provided reasons for 

segregating the 127 detainees with mental health conditions, and those 

reasons were in line with ICE detention standards and policy. The 

documentation also showed that, as required, the facilities medically cleared 

the detainees before segregation by assessing their medical and mental health 

status, determining care needs, and evaluating the appropriateness of 

segregation placement. In addition, for these 127 detainees, the detention 

facilities documented segregation placement information, as well as notification 

of continued segregation, to their respective ERO FOD. Finally, during our 

walkthroughs, we observed facility personnel appearing to comply with 

standards of care, cleanliness, and recordkeeping. 

Although documentation at the facilities showed staff were promptly reporting 

segregation placement information for these detainees with mental health 

conditions, the field offices did not record and promptly report all these 

instances of segregation to ICE headquarters, as required by the ICE directive. 

Specifically, through file reviews at the detention facilities, we identified 29 

instances of segregation involving 18 detainees that facilities had reported to 

ICE field offices, but that field office personnel did not report and record in 

SRMS. Field office personnel also did not record all required reviews of 

continued segregation in SRMS, as required by April 2015 guidance. Further, 

some reviews that were recorded in the system were not signed by the 

appropriate field office official or it was not clear who had signed them. In 

addition, ICE does not regularly compare segregation data in the electronic 

management system with information at detention facilities to assess the 

www.oig.dhs.gov 4 OIG-17-
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

accuracy and reliability of data in the system. 

To help protect detainees and facility staff, provide the best alternative for 

detainees with mental health conditions, and mitigate the risk of deteriorating 

detainees’ mental health, ICE field office staff need to comply with required 

procedures to properly document and accurately and promptly report on 

segregation of detainees with mental health conditions. Unless they do so, ICE 

headquarters cannot be sure required reviews are taking place and may not 

have all the information needed to assess the use of segregation, which could 

put detainees and facility staff at risk of harm. 

Some Instances of Segregation Were Not Entered into SRMS 

Through file reviews at the 7 detention facilities, we identified 29 instances of 

segregation involving 18 detainees with mental health conditions that detention 

facility personnel documented and reported to the appropriate ERO FOD, but 

the field office did not enter these instances into SRMS. In some cases, SRMS 

records were missing for single instances of segregation, but in one case, there 

was no SRMS record of a detainee placed in disciplinary segregation on four 

separate occasions. 

In some of the 29 cases missing from SRMS, detainees were segregated for 

fewer than 72 hours. Although the ICE directive requires FODs to notify ICE 

headquarters about all cases of segregation of detainees with mental health 

conditions, some ERO field office staff told us they did not believe they needed 

to document instances of segregation lasting fewer than 72 hours. At the 

conclusion of our fieldwork, CMD contacted the field offices we reviewed to 

ensure they recorded the 29 segregation placements in SRMS. In addition, on 

January 6, 2017, CMD issued a broadcast message, Expanded Guidance for 

Submitting Segregation Notifications, to all field office officials and SRMS users 

in the field reiterating that segregation cases need to be reported within 3 days, 

even if detainees are in segregation for fewer than 72 hours. Appendix C 

contains the broadcast message. 

Some Instances of Segregation Were Reported Late to ICE Headquarters 

ERO field office officials also did not always notify CMD within 72 hours 

(3 days) of detention facilities placing detainees with mental health conditions 

in segregation. Of the 188 instances of segregation entered into SRMS that we 

reviewed, 73 (39 percent) were entered into the system after the required 72 

hours. The number of days late varied; notifications were entered into SRMS 

between 4 and 6 days after placement, but in some instances, notifications 

were entered 11, 16, and in one case, 39 days after placement in segregation. 

www.oig.dhs.gov 5 OIG-17-
x

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

One CMD official suggested potential reasons for some of these delays. 

According to the official, ERO field office employees might not enter data on 

weekends and holidays when they are not working, which could cause them to 

exceed the 72-hour timeframe.3 The official also said that occasional system 

errors in SRMS prevent employees from entering data on time. 

Missing instances of segregation and late reporting of segregation of detainees 

with mental health conditions are of particular concern, especially for detainees 

who have been segregated multiple times or for longer lengths of time. Without 

this information, ICE cannot assess the effects of segregation on detainees’ 

health or determine suitable alternatives. As a result, ICE cannot be sure it is 

protecting these detainees adequately and could be putting the safety of 

detainees and facility staff at risk. 

ICE Cannot Be Assured Required Reviews Were Completed 

According to the ICE directive, FODs are required — at 72 hours, 14 days, 30 

days, and at every 30-day interval thereafter — to review instances of 

continued segregation of detainees with a mental health condition to determine 

whether the continued segregation is warranted and to ensure it complies with 

detention standards and policies. Further, on April 24, 2015, CMD issued 

updated guidance specifying that an Assistant Field Office Director (AFOD) or 

higher level official review and sign off on placement of any detainee in either 

disciplinary or administrative segregation. The guidance also directs ERO field 

office staff to upload into SRMS supporting documentation for each segregation 

review to document that the review occurred. 

Although FODs may have reviewed the 188 instances of segregation, ERO field 

offices did not always enter these required reviews into SRMS. Further, of the 

reviews documented in SRMS, some were not signed by a designee at the AFOD 

level or higher, as required. In other cases, it was unclear who had signed the 

review and whether the person was at the required level. Specifically: 

74 percent of 72-hour reviews were missing or not properly documented in 

SRMS. Given the instances of segregation in our sample, SRMS should 

have contained 72-hour reviews for all 188 segregation placements: 42 of 

these reviews were missing from SRMS; 25 were entered, but not signed by 

a designee at the AFOD level or higher; 73 reviews were entered, but it was 

not clear from the signature who the signatory was and whether the 

3 The January 6, 2017 broadcast message clarified that placement into segregation of detainees 

with special vulnerabilities should be recorded in SRMS within 3 work days, excluding 

weekends and Federal holidays. 

www.oig.dhs.gov 6 OIG-17-
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

person was at the AFOD level or higher. The remaining 48 were properly 

entered and signed. 

x	 75 percent of 14-day reviews were missing or not properly documented in 

SRMS. From our sample, SRMS should have contained 14-day reviews for 

91 segregation placements: 21 of these reviews were missing from SRMS; 2 

reviews were entered, but not signed at the AFOD level or higher; 45 

reviews were entered, but it was not clear from the signature who the 

signatory was and whether the person was at the AFOD level or higher. 

The remaining 23 were properly entered and signed. 

x	 67 percent of 30-day reviews were missing or not properly documented in 

SRMS. SRMS should have contained 30-day reviews for 46 segregation 

placements: 6 reviews were missing from SRMS; 1 review was entered but 

not signed at the AFOD level or higher; and 24 reviews were entered, but it 

was not clear from the signature who the signatory was and whether the 

person was at the AFOD level or higher. The remaining 15 were properly 

entered and signed. 

A high percentage of required reviews were either not recorded or were not 

properly documented in SRMS; therefore, ICE headquarters cannot be certain 

that the majority of these cases were actually reviewed as they should have 

been. This is concerning because these reviews help ensure that detainees with 

mental health conditions are protected from the potential harm of continued 

segregation. Further, even if the reviews had been completed, without 

comprehensive information, ICE headquarters cannot adequately assess the 

effects of segregation on these detainees. To ensure the health and safety of 

detainees with mental health conditions, as well as that of other detainees and 

facility staff, ICE needs to ensure that the appropriate officials at ERO field 

offices complete these reviews and that they are properly documented in SRMS. 

During our review, two field offices took action to ensure documentation of 

segregation reviews clearly showed sign-off by a designee at the AFOD level or 

higher. Further, in its January 2017 broadcast message, CMD directed AFODs 

or higher level officials who sign the reviews to include their printed name and 

current position. 

ICE also took action to correct inconsistencies between information captured in 

SRMS and documentation maintained at detention facilities. Specifically, 

documentation at the facilities showed lengths of segregation that were 1 day 

longer than were recorded in SRMS. At the end of our fieldwork, the Custody 

Programs Division in CMD discovered the methodology being used for SRMS 

did not accurately represent the segregation placement period. The official 

www.oig.dhs.gov 7	 OIG-17-
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

reporting team for CMD confirmed that a change in methodology would make 

the length of segregation accurate in SRMS; we were informed this change has 

been made. 

Conclusion 

Placing detainees with mental health conditions in segregation is a serious step 

that requires careful review and oversight to ensure it is necessary, protects 

staff and detainees, and is in detainees’ best interest. Without information from 

required reviews to help assess and make decisions about segregation, ICE 

may be missing opportunities to use alternatives that may be better for those 

with mental health conditions; for example, by removing detainees whose 

conditions exceed a facility’s capacity to care for them or who pose a threat to 

the safety of other detainees, staff, and orderly operation of the facility. Full 

review of segregation for detainees with mental health conditions will also help 

ICE ensure segregation is not deteriorating the detainee’s health.Ultimately, 

ensuring that field offices follow required procedures for segregation will 

strengthen ICE’s oversight and accountability and mitigate the risk of potential 

harm to facility staff and detainees. 

Recommendations 

We recommend that the Acting Director for U.S. Immigration and Customs 

Enforcement: 

Recommendation 1: Ensure that Enforcement and Removal Office FODs and 

AFODs are properly conducting the reviews of segregation decisions required 

by ICE policies and are held accountable for properly documenting that 

required reviews have been completed in the specified timeframe. 

Recommendation 2: Ensure that data on segregation placements and reviews 

in the Segregation Review Management System is regularly assessed for 

accuracy and reliability. 

Recommendation 3: Ensure that the current methodology for the segregation 

period accurately represents the length of segregation in the Segregation 

Review Management System. 

Management Comments and OIG Analysis 

ICE concurred with our recommendations and is taking steps to address them. 

Appendix A contains a copy of ICE’s management comments in their entirety. 

We also received and incorporated technical comments as appropriate. We 

www.oig.dhs.gov 8 OIG-17-
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

consider Recommendations 1 and 2 to be resolved and open. We consider 

Recommendation 3 closed. A summary of ICE’s responses and our analysis 

follows. 

ICE Response to Recommendation 1: ICE concurred with the 

recommendation. ICE said they currently have some internal controls in place, 

including periodic inspections by the ICE Office of Professional Responsibility’s 

Office of Detention Oversight. ICE also said CMD and a Detention Monitoring 

Council meet weekly and quarterly to discuss issues and concerns pertaining 

to long-term segregation placements, medical or mental illnesses, 

vulnerabilities, and other significant issues. ICE also noted that its January 6, 

2017 guidance provided additional, specific guidance and timeframes for field 

offices to adhere to when managing segregation placements. ICE will draft a 

self-inspection document for field offices to use to ensure their FODs and 

AFODs are complying with the directive. ICE anticipates this will be completed 

by September 30, 2018. 

OIG Analysis: We consider ICE’s planned actions responsive to 

Recommendation 1. We consider the recommendation resolved and open. We 

will close this recommendation when ICE implements its self-inspection 

process, provides guidance for use of the document, and explains how FODs 

and AFODs are being held accountable for properly documenting their reviews 

of segregation decisions. 

ICE Response to Recommendation 2: ICE concurred with the 

recommendation. ICE noted that the discrepancies found in our review of 

segregation placement data occurred before the January 6, 2017 guidance. ICE 

said this guidance has provided more specific guidance and timeframes, and 

since its issuance, the number of incorrect documents, signatures and illegible 

names has diminished significantly. ICE believes no further oversight is 

necessary. 

OIG Analysis: We consider ICE’s actions partially responsive to 

Recommendation 2. We acknowledge the January 6, 2017 guidance provides 

clarification on complying with the existing directive, and the reviews uploaded 

into SRMS are more clearly signed. However, ICE still needs a process to 

ensure no missing instances of segregation exist and all instances documented 

by the facility are entered into SRMS. ICE has an opportunity to incorporate 

this process in the field office self-inspections described in its response to 

Recommendation 1. We consider this recommendation resolved and open. We 

will close the recommendation when ICE confirms its process to ensure the 

data in SRMS is complete and accurate. 

www.oig.dhs.gov 9 OIG-17-
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

ICE Response to Recommendation 3: ICE concurred with the 

recommendation. ICE changed the methodology used to calculate the length of 

segregation placements in SRMS. Since this change, there are no longer 

discrepancies between the SRMS reports and the facility placement lengths. 

ICE believes no further oversight is necessary. 

OIG Analysis: We consider ICE’s actions responsive to Recommendation 3. 

CMD confirmed that a change in methodology would make the length of 

segregation accurate in SRMS; we were informed this change has been made. 

We consider this recommendation closed. 

www.oig.dhs.gov 10 OIG-17-
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Appendix A 

Comments to the Draft Report 

www.oig.dhs.gov 11 OIG-17-
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

www.oig.dhs.gov 12 OIG-17-
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

www.oig.dhs.gov 13 OIG-17-
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

www.oig.dhs.gov 14 OIG-17-
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Appendix B 

Objective, Scope, and Methodology 

DHS OIG was established by the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (Public Law 

107−296) by amendment to the Inspector General Act of 1978. We initiated this 

review to determine whether: (1) facility personnel follow ICE guidance for 

documenting segregation decisions for detainees with mental health conditions; 

(2) facilities report such segregation data accurately and promptly; and (3) ICE field 

offices follow procedures for reviewing segregation decisions about detainees with 

mental health conditions. 

To answer the objective, we reviewed prior ICE inspection reports on detention 

facilities used by ICE. We met with ERO and IHSC officials at ICE headquarters, as 

well as at selected field offices and detention facility staff, to discuss segregation 

processing, reporting, and oversight; identify alternatives to segregation; and follow 

up on observations and conditions identified during site visits. In addition, we 

reviewed prior reports from other Federal agencies that address segregating 

individuals with mental health conditions. 

Using this SRMS data from fiscal year 2015 and other factors such as prior 

inspection reports, we selected seven facilities to visit and review judgmental 

samples of instances in which detainees with mental health conditions were held in 

segregation. We visited the Buffalo Federal Detention Facility (a service processing 

center) in New York; two contract detention centers, the Northwest Detention Facility 

in Washington and the South Texas Detention Complex in Texas; and four 

Intergovernmental Service Agreement facilities, the Adelanto Detention Center in 

California, Baker County Sheriff’s Office in Florida, Tri-County Detention Center in 

Illinois, and York County Prison in Pennsylvania. At the seven facilities, we reviewed 

alien files, medical files, incident and grievance records, and detention and 

segregation files. We also toured these facilities to assess the confinement conditions 

for detainees in segregation. 

We also analyzed SRMS data from October 1, 2015, to June 30, 2016, which showed 

713 segregation placements for detainees with mental health conditions — 272 

disciplinary instances and 441 administrative instances. Some detainees were 

segregated multiple times. From the 713 segregation placements in this time period 

that were in SRMS, we selected and reviewed a judgmental sample of 189 instances 

of segregation involving 127 detainees with mental health conditions. Through file 

reviews at the seven detention facilities, we completed spreadsheet templates to 

capture information to indicate whether: (1) facility personnel follow ICE guidance 

for documenting segregation decisions for detainees with mental health conditions; 

(2) facilities report segregation data accurately and promptly; and (3) ICE field offices 

follow procedures for reviewing segregation. 

www.oig.dhs.gov 15 OIG-17-
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Within the spreadsheet, we completed a separate worksheet to confirm whether the 

information from SRMS for 189 instances of segregation was complete and accurate. 

One of the 189 instances of segregation was a duplicate and was removed from 

SRMS by an ICE segregation coordinator at ICE headquarters, leaving 188 instances 

of segregation. 

Our observations represent a single point in time and cannot be used to verify past 

conditions or predict ICE’s actions in the future. Our inspection results are limited 

by the scope and methodology we employed; although they are meaningful, these 

results should not be more broadly interpreted or generalized. 

We conducted this review between July 2016 and January 2017 under the authority 

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

Standards for Inspection and Evaluation issued by the Council of the Inspectors 

General on Integrity and Efficiency. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a 

reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based upon our objectives. 

www.oig.dhs.gov 16 OIG-17-
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Appendix C 

Expanded Guidance for Submitting Segregation Notifications 

Appendix C under review by DHS FOIA 

to ensure public release is appropriate 

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

Department of Homeland Security 

Page left intentionally blank 

www.oig.dhs.gov 18 OIG-17-
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Appendix D
 

Major contributors to this report: 

Angela Garvin, Chief Inspector 

Inez Jordan, Lead Inspector 

Stephanie Christian, Lead Inspector 

LaDana Crowell, Lead Inspector 

Lorraine Eide, Lead Inspector 

Kimberley Lake de Pulla, Senior Inspector 

Jennifer Berry, Senior Inspector 

Michael Brooks, Senior Inspector 

Adam Brown, Senior Inspector 

Stephen Farrell, Senior Inspector 

Ayana Henry, Senior Inspector 

Jason Wahl, Senior Inspector 

Anthony Crawford, Intelligence Officer 

Renita Hunter-Caracciolo, Inspector 

James Johnson III, Inspector 

Paul Lewandowski, Inspector 

Adam Robinson, Inspector 

Brittany Scott, Administrative Officer 

Kelly Herberger, Communications Analyst 

Marybeth Dellibovi, Referencer 

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

Department of Homeland Security 

Appendix E 

Report Distribution 

Department of Homeland Security 

Secretary 

Deputy Secretary 

Chief of Staff 

Deputy Chiefs of Staff 

General Counsel 

Executive Secretary 

Director, GAO/OIG Liaison Office 

Assistant Secretary for Office of Policy 

Assistant Secretary for Office of Public Affairs 

Assistant Secretary for Office of Legislative Affairs 

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement 

Acting Director 

Executive Associate Director, Enforcement and Removal Operations 

Audit Liaison 

Office of Management and Budget 

Chief, Homeland Security Branch 

DHS OIG Budget Examiner 

Congress 

Congressional Oversight and Appropriations Committees 

Honorable Bernard Sanders 

www.oig.dhs.gov 20 OIG-17-
Additional Information and Copies 

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

www.oig.dhs.gov. 

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

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

Follow us on Twitter at: @dhsoig. 

OIG Hotline 

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

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

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

Department of Homeland Security 

Office of Inspector General, Mail Stop 0305 

Attention: Hotline 

245 Murray Drive, SW 

Washington, DC 20528-0305