SEX OFFENDERS

ICE Could Better 

Inform Offenders It 

Supervises of 

Registration 

Responsibilities and 

Notify Jurisdictions 

when Offenders Are 

Removed

Report to Congressional Requesters

September 2013

GAO-13-832

United States Government Accountability Office
United States Government Accountability Office

Highlights of GAO-13-832, a report to 

congressional requesters 

September 2013 

SEX OFFENDERS

ICE Could Better Inform Offenders It Supervises of 

Registration Responsibilities and Notify 

Jurisdictions when Offenders Are Removed 

Why GAO Did This Study

ICE-ERO uses orders of supervision to 

release from custody criminal aliens—

including sex offenders—who have 

been ordered to be removed from the 

United States, but cannot be removed 

for various reasons or detained 

indefinitely under U.S. Supreme Court 

precedent. In July 2006, SORNA was 

enacted, which established minimum 

standards for sex offender registration

and notification. Congressional 

requesters asked GAO to assess

registration of alien sex offenders. This 

report addresses the extent to which

alien sex offenders (1) under ICE-ERO 

order of supervision are registered and 

(2) who are removed or released under 

ICE-ERO order of supervision are 

informed of registration requirements 

and relevant jurisdiction officials are 

notified about these offenders. GAO 

analyzed a representative sample of 

131 of 1,309 alien sex offenders who

were under orders of supervision as of 

September 2012. GAO also

interviewed officials from ICE-ERO, the 

SMART Office, and other relevant 

federal, state registry and local law 

enforcement agencies. 

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends, among other 

things, that ICE-ERO (1) set a deadline

for its review of options for providing 

notifications to and about alien sex 

offenders under supervision and (2) in 

consultation with SMART and others, 

consider options for notifying 

jurisdictions about removed offenders. 

ICE agreed with the recommendations. 

What GAO Found

On the basis of GAO’s analysis of a representative sample of 131 alien sex 

offenders under U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) supervision, 

GAO estimates that as of September 2012, 72 percent of alien sex offenders 

were registered, 22 percent were not required to register, and 5 percent did not 

register but should have. According to officials, offenders were not required to 

register for various reasons, such as the offense not requiring registration in 

some states. Of the 6 offenders in GAO’s sample that should have registered, 

officials from ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations (ICE-ERO) field offices 

informed 4 of their registration requirements. However, officials at some of these 

field offices identified several reasons why they did not ensure that these 

offenders actually registered. For example, the offender may have moved and no 

longer resided in the area of responsibility for that particular field office. ICE had 

not informed the remaining 2 offenders of their registration requirements.

Alien sex offenders are not consistently informed of potential registration 

requirements, and relevant jurisdiction officials—that is, state, territorial, and 

tribal sex offender registry and law enforcement officials—are not consistently

notified when an offender is removed from the country or released. The Sex 

Offender Registration and Notification Act of 2006 (SORNA) and other federal 

laws identify when sex offenders and relevant jurisdiction officials should be 

notified. However, the agencies that have these notification responsibilities are 

limited in their ability to provide information to and about alien sex offenders, in 

part because they do not know when ICE-ERO will release or remove these 

offenders. ICE-ERO has a procedure in place to inform alien sex offenders who 

are being removed about potential registration requirements, but not alien sex 

offenders who are being released into the community under supervision, 

primarily because ICE-ERO is uncertain whether it has a responsibility to do so. 

ICE-ERO also does not consistently notify relevant jurisdiction officials when an 

alien sex offender is removed or released under supervision, for similar reasons. 

However, officials from the Department of Justice’s Sex Offender Sentencing, 

Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking (SMART) Office said that 

state correctional facilities, in the interest of public safety, have notification 

processes in place, even though sometimes not required to do so. ICE-ERO is 

reviewing options for informing alien sex offenders under supervision about their 

potential registration requirements and notifying jurisdictions when alien sex 

offenders are released under supervision, but has not established a deadline for 

completing its review, which is inconsistent with project management standards. 

Without a deadline, it will be difficult to hold ICE-ERO accountable for providing 

these notifications. Further, ICE-ERO does not plan to notify relevant jurisdictions 

when an alien sex offender is removed. Providing such notification could help 

jurisdictions ensure public safety and avoid unnecessarily spending resources 

trying to locate the offender. 

This is a public version of a sensitive security report GAO issued in August 2013, 

which also included information about steps ICE has taken to determine its 

responsibility for informing alien sex offenders of their notification requirements.

View GAO-13-832. For more information, 

contact Eileen R. Larence at (202) 512-8777 

or larencee@gao.gov. 
Page i GAO-13-832 Sex Offenders 

Letter 1 

Background 6

Most Alien Sex Offenders under ICE-ERO Supervision Were 

Registered, but About 5 Percent Were Not 7

Alien Sex Offenders May Not Be Informed of Potential Registration 

Requirements, and Jurisdiction Officials May Not Be Notified 

When an Offender Is Removed or Released 9

Conclusions 21

Recommendations for Executive Action 22

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 22

Appendix I Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 25

Appendix II Sex Offender Notification Requirements in the Sex Offender 

Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) and Other Federal 

Statutes 29

Appendix III Comments from the Department of Homeland Security 30

Appendix IV GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 32

Figure

Figure 1: Gaps in Notifications Provided to and about Alien Sex 

Offenders Who Are Removed or Released under U.S. 

Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Enforcement and 

Removal Operations (ICE-ERO) Supervision 12

Contents 
Page ii GAO-13-832 Sex Offenders 

Abbreviations

BOP Federal Bureau of Prisons

DHS Department of Homeland Security

DOJ Department of Justice

FBI Federal Bureau of Investigation

ICE Immigration and Customs Enforcement

ICE-ERO ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations

NCIC National Crime Information Center

NSOR National Sex Offender Registry

OPLA Office of the Principal Legal Advisor

SMART Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending,

 Registering, and Tracking

SORNA Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act of 2006

USMS U.S. Marshals Service

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

United States. The published product 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-13-832 Sex Offenders 

441 G St. N.W.

Washington, DC 20548

September 12, 2013

Congressional Requesters

The Enforcement and Removal Operations directorate of U.S. 

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE-ERO) is responsible for the 

identification, apprehension, detention, and removal of removable aliens.1

ICE-ERO prioritizes the removal of convicted criminals, among other 

groups. However, there are circumstances in which criminal aliens who 

have been ordered removed from the United States—including those 

convicted of a sex offense—cannot be removed. For example, a criminal 

alien may not be removed because the designated country will not accept 

the alien’s return. The decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in Zadvydas v. 

Davis imposes strict limits on ICE’s ability to detain aliens beyond 6 

months after the issuance of a final order of removal if removal is not 

significantly likely in the reasonably foreseeable future.2 In these 

instances, ICE-ERO may release the alien into the community under an 

order of supervision.3

Given the risk that some individuals previously convicted of a sex offense 

may pose, in July 2006, Congress passed and the President signed the 

Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act of 2006 (SORNA), which 

provided a new set of sex offender registration and notification standards, 

including criminal penalties for those who fail to comply with these 

According to U.S. Immigration and Customs 

Enforcement (ICE), of the 59,347 aliens under an order of supervision as 

of September 2012, 2,837 (5 percent) of them had been convicted of a 

sex offense.

 

1

An alien is any person who is not a citizen or national of the United States. See 8 U.S.C. 

§ 1101(a)(3).

2

533 U.S. 678 (2001).

3

See 8 C.F.R. §§ 241.4, 241.5 & 241.13. While under supervision, the alien is required to 

meet certain conditions, such as not traveling outside of a specified geographic area for 

more than 48 hours without first notifying the ICE-ERO officer. The alien is also required to 

meet in person with an ICE-ERO deportation officer at a frequency determined by the 

officer. During those meetings, the deportation officer determines whether the alien has 

complied with the conditions of release and checks law enforcement databases—such as 

the National Crime Information Center (NCIC), which is maintained by the Federal Bureau 

of Investigation—to determine whether the alien has been arrested, has a warrant out for 

arrest, or is wanted. 

 
 

Page 2 GAO-13-832 Sex Offenders 

standards.4 These standards require convicted sex offenders to register 

and keep the registration current in the state, territorial, or tribal 

jurisdictions in which they live, work, and attend school, and for initial 

registration purposes only, in the jurisdiction in which they were 

convicted, if such jurisdiction is different from the jurisdiction of 

residence.5 Registration generally entails convicted sex offenders 

appearing in person at a specified agency—often a local law enforcement 

agency—within the jurisdiction to provide the agency with personal 

information, such as name, date of birth, and Social Security number, 

among other information. The law enforcement agency enters this 

information into the jurisdiction’s sex offender registry, and the agency 

that manages the jurisdiction’s registry—such as the state police 

department, department of public safety, or the attorney general’s office—

enters this information into the national sex offender registration system, 

composed of a national database and a national website. The national 

database, called the National Sex Offender Registry (NSOR), is operated 

by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), while the national website—

the Dru Sjodin National Sex Offender Public Website (public website)—is 

maintained by the Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, 

Registering, and Tracking (SMART) Office within the Department of 

Justice (DOJ).6

This report summarizes the results of the third review, in a series of four, 

that we are conducting in response to a congressional request that we 

assess various aspects of SORNA implementation. We completed the 

first two reviews in February 2013; one on progress that states and 

territories have made in implementing SORNA, and another on federal 

efforts to identify registered sex offenders who are traveling 

Using the national registry information, jurisdictions are 

able to track offenders following their release into the community, which 

helps ensure public safety in regard to sex offenders, including alien sex

offenders who are released but not removed from the country.

 

4

Pub. L. No. 109-248, tit. I, 120 Stat. 587, 590-611. 

5

42 U.S.C. § 16913(a).

6

Prompted by the November 2003 murder of Dru Sjodin, by a registered sex offender, 

Alfonso Rodriguez, Jr., the Dru Sjodin National Sex Offender Public Website was created 

to provide the public with access to sex offender data nationwide. 
 

Page 3 GAO-13-832 Sex Offenders 

internationally.7

(1) To what extent are alien sex offenders under an ICE-ERO order of 

supervision registered as sex offenders?

In August 2013, we began another review on progress 

that tribal jurisdictions have made in implementing SORNA. For this 

review, we assessed the extent to which aliens living under order of 

supervision were registered as sex offenders in the jurisdictions of 

residence. Specifically, this report addresses the following questions:

(2) To what extent are alien sex offenders who are removed from the 

country or released under an ICE-ERO order of supervision informed 

of registration requirements, and state sex offender registry and law 

enforcement officials notified about these offenders?

This report is a public version of the prior sensitive report that we 

provided to you. ICE deemed some of the information in the prior report 

as For Official Use Only (FOUO), which must be protected from public 

disclosure. Therefore, this report omits information about additional steps 

that ICE has taken, or could take, to determine what, if any, responsibility 

ICE-ERO has with regard to informing alien sex offenders of their 

registration requirements. The information in this report is more limited in 

scope as it excludes such sensitive information, but the overall questions 

and methodology used for both reports is the same.

To address our objectives, we drew a random probability sample of 137 

of the 1,369 alien sex offenders who, as of September 2012, were under 

order of supervision and for whom ICE had a record of the alien’s 

complete date of birth. We subsequently found that six individuals from 

our sample should not have been included in the population of alien sex 

offenders under an ICE-ERO order of supervision, resulting in a final 

sample size of 131 and an estimated total population of 1,309.8

 

7

GAO, Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act: Jurisdictions Face Challenges to 

Implementing the Act, and Stakeholders Report Positive and Negative Effects, 

Percentage estimates derived from this sample have margins of error at 

GAO-13-211 (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 7, 2013), and Registered Sex Offenders: Sharing 

More Information Will Enable Federal Agencies to Improve Notifications of Sex Offenders’ 

International Travel, GAO-13-200 (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 14, 2013).

8

Because we found individuals in our sample who should have been excluded from the 

population, we used the number of these individuals to statistically estimate the true size 

of the population of relevant individuals.
 

Page 4 GAO-13-832 Sex Offenders 

the 95 percent confidence level of plus or minus 8.08 percentage points.9

We chose September 2012 because we requested this information as 

part of a separate review, and this date provided us with current 

information at the time.10

To determine whether each alien sex offender in our sample was 

registered in the state where the offender resides, in February and March 

2013, we searched the public website. On the basis of the search results, 

we divided the alien sex offenders into three categories: (1) definitely 

included in the public website, meaning there was an exact match on the 

name and date of birth for the alien sex offender in the public website; (2) 

possibly included in the public website, meaning there was a partial or 

similar name, date of birth, or age in the public website (e.g., J. Smith as 

opposed to John Smith), but not an exact match; and (3) definitely not 

included in the public website, meaning the public website did not include 

the offender’s exact name or date of birth or even a partial or similar 

name, date of birth, or age. For the offenders who were possibly included 

and definitely not included in the public website, using the addresses ICEERO provided to us, we contacted sex offender registration officials in 

each of the 27 states where these offenders were located to determine 

whether the officials were aware of the offenders and whether the 

offenders were registered. We assessed the reliability of the data ICE 

provided by questioning knowledgeable agency officials and reviewing 

the data for obvious errors and anomalies. We determined that the data 

were sufficiently reliable for our purposes.

To determine the extent to which alien sex offenders who are removed 

from the country or under ICE-ERO order of supervision are informed of 

registration requirements, and whether relevant sex offender registration 

and law enforcement officials are notified about these offenders, we 

reviewed SORNA, other applicable laws, and guidelines developed by the 

SMART Office to obtain information on federal sex offender registration 

requirements. We also met with policy officials from the ICE-ERO 

 

9

Because we followed a probability procedure based on random selection, our sample is 

only one of a large number of samples that we might have drawn. Since each sample 

could have provided different estimates, we express our confidence in the precision of our 

particular sample’s results as a 95 percent confidence interval (e.g., plus or minus 8.08 

percentage points). This is the interval that would contain the actual population value for 

95 percent of the samples we could have drawn. 

10GAO-13-200. 
 

Page 5 GAO-13-832 Sex Offenders 

Executive Information and Reporting Unit; the Director and policy 

advisors for the SMART office; officials from the U.S. Marshals Service 

(USMS); headquarters officials with the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP); 

and state sex offender registry and local law enforcement officials in 

Minnesota, Florida, and Maryland. We selected Minnesota and Florida 

because they are among the states where the largest number of alien sex 

offenders in our sample who were not included in the public website 

reside. We selected Maryland because local law enforcement officials in 

this state had raised concerns about the registration of alien sex 

offenders during our prior work, which we completed in February 2013.11

In addition, we conducted phone interviews with ICE-ERO field office 

directors and deputy directors in the field offices that either released or 

currently supervise the alien sex offenders in our sample who were not 

registered, but potentially should have been. We also conducted phone 

interviews with U.S. Marshals Service officials in these same locations. 

While these officials’ perspectives cannot be generalized to all states and 

to all ICE-ERO and U.S. Marshals Service field offices, they provided 

insights into the registration of alien sex offenders under order of 

supervision. We compared the sex offender notification requirements in 

SORNA and other federal statutes with the notifications that state and 

federal agencies provide to alien sex offenders to determine if there were 

any gaps. We then obtained perspectives from the federal, state, and 

local officials we interviewed on how best to address these gaps. We also 

compared efforts that ICE-ERO has under way regarding notifications to 

and about alien sex offenders with internal control standards pertaining to 

communication with stakeholders and program management standards 

that involve establishing milestone dates and deadlines.12

We conducted this performance audit from January 2013 to September 

2013 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing 

standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to 

obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence for our findings and conclusions 

based on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained 

For more 

information on our scope and methodology, see appendix I.

 

11GAO-13-211. 

12GAO, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government, GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1

(Washington, D.C.: November 1999) ,and the Project Management Institute’s The 

Standard for Program Management (Newton Square, PA © 2006). 
 

Page 6 GAO-13-832 Sex Offenders 

provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on 

our audit objectives.

The purpose of SORNA is to protect the public from sex offenders and 

offenders against children by providing a comprehensive set of sex 

offender registration and notification standards. These standards require 

convicted sex offenders, prior to their release from imprisonment or within 

3 days of their sentencing if the sentence does not involve imprisonment, 

to register and keep the registration current in the jurisdictions in which 

they live, work, and attend school, and for initial registration purposes 

only, in the jurisdiction in which they were convicted, if such jurisdiction is 

different from the jurisdiction of residence.13

NSOR, which is part of the National Crime Information Center (NCIC), is 

operated by the FBI.

The registration agency also 

is to document the text of the provision of law defining the criminal 

offense for which the offender is registered; the criminal history of the 

offender, including dates of all arrests and convictions, and any other 

information SORNA or the Attorney General requires. In addition, 

jurisdictions are to maintain a jurisdiction-wide sex offender registry and 

adopt registration requirements that are at least as strict as those SORNA 

established. The length of time that convicted sex offenders must 

continue to update their registration is life, 25 years, or 15 years, 

depending on the seriousness of the crimes for which they were 

convicted and with possible reductions for maintaining a clean record. 

The frequency with which sex offenders must update or verify their 

information—either quarterly, semiannually, or annually—also depends 

on the seriousness of the crime.

14

 

1342 U.S.C. § 16913.

The database is accessible to law enforcement 

officials but not to the public. The public website, which is maintained by 

SMART, links state, territory, and tribal public notification websites, 

making sex offender registration information readily available to both law 

enforcement and the public on a nationwide basis. Using this website, 

individuals can access information on sex offenders in different 

jurisdictions. However, state and local authorities that conduct and 

14NCIC is an information system that provides law enforcement agencies with around-theclock access to federal, state, and local crime data, including criminal record histories and 

wanted and missing person records. 

Background
 

Page 7 GAO-13-832 Sex Offenders 

manage sex offender registration and notification activities are exclusively 

responsible for the inclusion, accuracy, and integrity of the information 

provided by their respective websites.

SORNA and other federal laws identify certain points in time when sex 

offenders should be informed of their registration requirements and when 

relevant jurisdiction officials—that is, state, territorial, and tribal sex 

offender registry and law enforcement officials—should be informed that a 

sex offender has been released in their jurisdiction. For example, 42 

U.S.C. § 16917 states that, shortly before the release of the sex offender 

from custody for the offense giving rise to the duty to register, an 

appropriate official must (1) inform the sex offender of that person’s duties 

under SORNA and explain those duties, (2) require the sex offender to 

read and sign a form stating the duty to register has been explained, and 

(3) ensure that the sex offender is registered. In addition, 18 U.S.C. § 

4042(c) requires BOP and federal probation officers to (1) inform the sex 

offender of the requirements of SORNA and (2) notify the agency 

responsible for sex offender registration in the jurisdiction in which the sex 

offender will reside. BOP is required to take these actions if the offender 

receives a prison sentence; federal probation officers are required to take 

these actions when the offender is sentenced to probation. See app. II for 

additional information about these statutory notification requirements.

On the basis of our analysis of a representative sample of 131 alien sex 

offenders under ICE supervision, and for whom ICE had a record of the 

alien’s complete date of birth, we estimate that as of September 2012, 72 

percent of alien sex offenders were registered in the jurisdictions where 

they lived, 22 percent were not required to register, and 5 percent did not 

register but should have.15

 

15State registry officials we contacted could not confirm the registration requirements for 1 

alien. Percentage estimates have margins of error at the 95 percent confidence level of 

plus or minus 8.08 percentage points. Percentages do not add to 100 because of 

rounding.

Twenty-two percent of alien sex offenders in 

our sample (29 of 131) were not required to register in the states where 

they reside, according to the sex offender registration officials. Reasons 

these offenders were not required to register include the following:

Most Alien Sex 

Offenders under ICEERO Supervision 

Were Registered, but 

About 5 Percent Were 

Not
 

Page 8 GAO-13-832 Sex Offenders 

• The specific offense did not require registration in those states or the 

offense had been committed before registration was required (20 

offenders),

• the period during which the offender was required to register had 

ended (8 offenders), or

• the offender was deceased (1 offender).

For example, 1 alien sex offender was convicted of a sex offense in 1997 

and was required to register only while he was on probation, which ended 

in March 2003. Six other alien sex offenders who were convicted of 

various sex offenses were not required to register because their 

conviction or supervised release occurred prior to a statutory requirement 

to register. Another offender, in Texas, was convicted of operating a 

“sexually oriented business,” which does not require registration as a sex 

offender.

However, 6 alien sex offenders in our sample (5 percent) should have 

been registered but were not, which means that, as of September 2012, 

an estimated 60 alien sex offenders under orders of supervision 

nationwide, for whom ICE had a record of their complete birthdays, were 

not registered but should have been.16

 

16We are 95 percent confident that the actual number of alien sex offenders under orders 

of supervision nationwide, for whom ICE had a record of their complete birthdays, who 

were not registered but should have been is between 22 and 127.

Law enforcement officials reported 

having no record of 3 of these 6 offenders, but the crimes these aliens 

committed should have triggered registration. The ICE-ERO field office 

did not inform 2 of the 6 alien sex offenders about their registration 

requirements, but did inform the remaining 4 offenders. However, officials 

at some field offices identified several reasons why they did not ensure 

that these offenders actually registered. First, the offender may have 

moved to another state and no longer resided in the area of responsibility 

for that particular field office. In this instance, it would be incumbent upon 

the field office that covers the jurisdiction where the offender currently 

lives to follow up with the offender regarding registration. Second, the 

officials explained that when aliens report to their deportation officer, the 

officer is required, among other things, to check NCIC to determine 

whether the alien has been arrested for any other crimes, the alien is 

wanted by another law enforcement agency, or there is a warrant for the 
 

Page 9 GAO-13-832 Sex Offenders 

alien’s arrest.17

Other state and federal correctional and supervision agencies are limited 

in the information they can provide to and about alien sex offenders to 

help ensure that these offenders are registered, but ICE-ERO may be in a 

position to help address these notification gaps. We found that ICE-ERO 

informs alien sex offenders who are removed from the country about 

potential registration requirements, but ICE-ERO does not consistently 

inform alien sex offenders who are released under ICE-ERO supervision 

about these requirements. Further, relevant jurisdiction officials may not 

be notified about the whereabouts of an alien sex offender when an alien 

sex offender is removed from the country or when an alien sex offender is 

released under ICE-ERO supervision, which could have an impact on 

jurisdictions’ ability to monitor these offenders if they return to the

jurisdictions’ communities. ICE-ERO stated that it is assessing options to 

best accomplish the goal of sex offender notification programs, including 

incorporating notification requirements for all alien sex offenders released 

under ICE-ERO supervision. However, ICE-ERO has not identified a 

deadline for when it will complete its assessment of the various options, 

nor does ICE-ERO plan to notify jurisdictions when an alien sex offender 

is removed from the country.

The deportation officer can, on the officer’s own initiative, 

ask the alien whether or not the alien registered as a sex offender. 

However, according to ICE-ERO, depending on the individual 

circumstances, failure to register may not be a sufficient basis to return 

the alien to ICE custody.

Federal and state correctional and supervision agencies have processes 

in place to inform sex offenders of their registration requirements and 

notify jurisdictions when sex offenders are released from criminal custody. 

However, there are gaps in the information that these agencies can 

provide regarding alien sex offenders who will be taken into ICE-ERO 

custody, and ICE-ERO may be in a position to help fill these gaps. For 

example, we found that BOP has a process in place to inform inmates 

who are sex offenders about their registration requirements at least 5 

days prior to releasing them. Under SORNA, these offenders are then 

required to register in the jurisdiction where they will reside within 3 

 

17Deportation officers work with other federal law enforcement officials to identify, locate, 

and arrest aliens subject to removal and are responsible for ensuring the physical removal 

of such aliens from the United States. 

Alien Sex Offenders 

May Not Be Informed 

of Potential 

Registration 

Requirements, and 

Jurisdiction Officials 

May Not Be Notified 

When an Offender Is 

Removed or Released

Other Agencies Inform Sex 

Offenders of Requirements 

and Notify Jurisdiction 

Officials, but Are Limited 

in What They Can Do to 

Help Ensure Alien Sex 

Offenders Are Registered
 

Page 10 GAO-13-832 Sex Offenders 

business days of being released from prison.18 However, alien sex 

offenders with final orders of removal who are transferred to ICE-ERO 

custody upon their release from prison are not able to register 

immediately. Rather, if these offenders are not removed from the country, 

they must wait until they are released by ICE-ERO to register. In these 

instances, it could be as long as 90 days or more from the time when 

alien sex offenders are informed of their registration requirements until 

they are actually able to register.19

Federal probation officers, as well as probation officers in the three states 

included in our review, are also required to inform sex offenders under 

their supervision about their registration requirements; this includes alien 

sex offenders who are simultaneously on probation while under ICE-ERO 

supervision.

According to SMART Office officials—

who are responsible for providing guidance to jurisdictions and federal 

agencies on how to implement SORNA requirements, given the time that 

would have passed, it would be beneficial to remind alien sex offenders of 

their potential registration requirements upon their release from ICE-ERO 

custody.

20

In addition to informing alien sex offenders of their registration 

requirements, correctional facilities in some states that we reviewed 

However, not all alien sex offenders are on probation at the 

same time that they are under ICE-ERO supervision, in which case these 

offenders may not be informed of their potential registration requirements 

upon release from ICE-ERO custody.

 

1842 U.S.C. § 16913(b)(2). Depending on the jurisdiction, including whether or not the 

jurisdiction has substantially implemented SORNA, the sex offender may be allowed more 

or less time to register upon release from prison.

19The removal period, including detention pending removal, is generally 90 days but can 

be extended if the alien fails or refuses to make timely application in good faith for travel or 

other documents necessary for departure or conspires or acts to prevent removal. 8 

U.S.C. § 1231(a)(1)-(2). Prior to removing an alien with a final order of removal, ICE may 

release the alien under order of supervision if it determines that the alien would not pose a 

danger to the public or a risk of flight. Alternatively, if the alien poses such a danger or 

risk, but after approximately 6 months in detention the alien’s removal is not significantly 

likely in the reasonably foreseeable future, ICE will typically release the individual on an 

order of supervision. See 8 C.F.R. §§ 241.4, 241.5 & 241.13.

2042 U.S.C §16917(a) and 18 U.S.C. § 4042(c)(3). We were not able to determine 

whether any of the 131 alien sex offenders in our sample were on probation while under 

ICE supervision because ICE does not maintain this information in its case management 

system. 
 

Page 11 GAO-13-832 Sex Offenders 

register the offenders while they are incarcerated and before they are 

transferred to ICE-ERO custody; however, federal correctional facilities 

are not able to do so. SORNA states that sex offenders shall initially 

register before completing a sentence of imprisonment with respect to the 

offense giving rise to the registration requirement and that an appropriate 

official shall, shortly before release of the offender from custody for such 

an offense, ensure that the offender is registered.21

BOP, on the other hand, is not able to register sex offenders, including 

alien sex offenders who will be taken into ICE-ERO custody, prior to their 

release from prison because federal agencies do not have the authority to 

register sex offenders; rather, that authority lies exclusively with the 

states, territories, and tribes. However, according to BOP, even if BOP 

had the authority to register sex offenders, BOP would not have to do so 

for alien sex offenders who will be taken into ICE-ERO custody upon their 

release from a BOP facility. BOP considers this to be a transfer, not a 

release, from BOP custody to ICE-ERO custody, in which case BOP 

would not be required to ensure that the offender is registered prior to the 

offender leaving the BOP facility.

State registry and 

local law enforcement officials we interviewed in Florida, Maryland, and 

Minnesota said that correctional facilities in their states register sex 

offenders, including alien sex offenders, prior to releasing them. Officials 

from two of these states also explained that for alien sex offenders who 

are released from the state correctional facility and immediately taken into 

ICE custody, the state correctional facility annotates this in the state 

registration system. Law enforcement officials stated that this enables 

them to follow up with ICE on the status of the alien sex offender, which 

helps them to ensure that the information on the status and location of 

these offenders is current.

22 Federal law also requires BOP to 

notify registry and law enforcement officials in the jurisdiction where the 

offender will reside that the offender has been released from custody.23

 

2142 U.S.C. §§ 16913(b), 16917(a)(3).

However, BOP does not provide this notice for alien sex offenders who 

22ICE-ERO stated that from its perspective, when an alien offender is taken into ICE 

custody following the offender’s release from a BOP facility, this is not a transfer. Rather, 

the offender’s criminal sentence is considered to be complete when BOP releases the 

offender, and ICE is exercising its independent authority to take the alien offender into 

custody thereafter. 

2318 U.S.C. § 4042(c)(1)-(2). 
 

Page 12 GAO-13-832 Sex Offenders 

are taken into ICE-ERO custody upon their release from a BOP facility, in 

part because BOP does not know where ICE-ERO will detain the 

offender. BOP officials stated that ICE-ERO would be in the best position 

to notify jurisdiction officials that the agency has a sex offender in its 

custody because ICE-ERO would know where the offender is being 

detained and ultimately where the offender will be released. Figure 1 

illustrates the gaps in notifications provided to and about alien sex 

offenders who are removed from the country or released under ICE-ERO 

supervision.

Figure 1: Gaps in Notifications Provided to and about Alien Sex Offenders Who Are Removed or Released under U.S. 

Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Enforcement and Removal Operations (ICE-ERO) Supervision
 

Page 13 GAO-13-832 Sex Offenders 

ICE-ERO has a mechanism in place to inform alien sex offenders who are 

being removed from the country about potential registration requirements. 

In response to concerns raised by the U.S. Marshals Service that alien 

sex offenders who were being removed from the country were not aware 

of registration requirements, ICE-ERO, in consultation with DOJ, 

established a mechanism to inform all removed offenders about these 

requirements. Persons who are being removed from the United States 

are required to sign one of two forms—Warning to Alien Ordered 

Removed or Deported (Form I-294) or Notice to Alien Ordered 

Removed/Departure Verification (Form I-296)—which are used to provide 

information to aliens such as the length of time they are prohibited from 

reentering the United States, among other things. In early 2012, ICE-ERO 

added a notice to these two forms that explained that alien sex offenders 

must register if they ever return to the United States, and failure to do so 

could result in prosecution.24

However, ICE-ERO does not have a mechanism to ensure that all sex 

offenders under order of supervision are informed about potential 

registration requirements. According to ICE-ERO, given the uncertainty 

surrounding its legal role in informing alien sex offenders in its custody 

about potential registration requirements, ICE-ERO has not yet 

established a nationwide mechanism for informing all sex offenders on 

order of supervision about their potential registration requirements.

Officials from the U.S. Marshals Service—

which is responsible for investigating cases in which sex offenders fail to 

register—stated that having this notification mechanism in place will 

improve their ability to provide evidence to support the prosecution of 

offenders who fail to register because it is important for the prosecutor to 

demonstrate that the offender was aware of the registration requirements.

25

 

24The specific language added to the forms is as follows: “Federal Law requires a 

convicted sex offender, including an alien who has been removed from or otherwise 

departed the United States and subsequently returns, to register in each jurisdiction in the 

United States in which he or she resides, is employed, or is a student. Violation of this 

requirement can result in prosecution and imprisonment for up to 10 years under Title 18 

United States Code, Section 2250.” 

ICEERO field offices can choose to establish their own procedures for 

informing these offenders. Specifically, ICE-ERO field offices have the 

option of using an addendum to a particular form that ICE-ERO provides 

25 Information about additional steps that ICE has taken, or could take, to determine what, 

if any, responsibility ICE-ERO has with regard to informing alien sex offenders of their 

registration requirements was omitted because ICE considered it to be FOUO.

ICE-ERO Informs 

Removed Alien Sex 

Offenders about Potential 

Registration Requirements, 

but Does Not Consistently 

Inform Alien Sex 

Offenders under 

Supervision about Such 

Requirements
 

Page 14 GAO-13-832 Sex Offenders 

to alien sex offenders under order of supervision to inform these 

offenders about potential registration requirements. Before releasing an 

alien under order of supervision, ICE-ERO requires aliens to review and 

sign Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Form I-220B, Order of 

Supervision, which explains the alien’s conditions of release. The form 

also allows for additional conditions to be identified in an addendum. The 

addendum includes the following condition for aliens convicted of a sex 

offense: “That you register as a sex offender, if applicable, within 7 days 

of being released, with the appropriate agency(s) and provide ICE with 

written proof of such within 10 days.” Officials from two of the five ICEERO field offices included in our review told us they have an office policy 

in place that requires deportation officers to inform alien sex offenders 

under supervision about potential registration requirements. Both offices 

use the addendum to the Form I-220B to inform these offenders.

However, as part of a broader effort that began in 2009 to review and 

revise ICE’s policy on reporting requirements under orders of release on 

recognizance and orders of supervision, ICE-ERO officials indicated that 

they must take additional steps before finalizing pending revisions.26 For 

example, revisions to the Form I-220B must be put through the agency’s 

formal clearance process before a revised version can be published. 

Also, given the uncertainty surrounding its legal role in informing alien sex 

offenders in its custody about potential registration requirements, the 

agency needs to assess whether there is a legal obligation for ICE-ERO 

to notify alien sex offenders of their requirements to register.27

 

26An order of release on recognizance outlines the specific requirements an alien being 

released from ICE custody must meet as a condition of the alien’s release, such as the 

need for the alien to obtain written permission from an ICE official before changing 

residence. An order of release on recognizance is used to release certain aliens from 

detention while proceedings to determine whether they are removable are still pending; an 

order of supervision is used for aliens released from ICE custody who are already subject 

to a final order of removal. See 8 C.F.R. pt. 236, subpt. A; pt. 241, subpt. A.

According 

to ICE officials, if ICE-ERO determines that there is no such obligation, it 

will then decide whether or not to retain, as a matter of policy, the 

language in the Form I-220B addendum regarding sex offender 

registration.

27 Information about additional steps that ICE has taken, or could take, to determine what, 

if any, responsibility ICE-ERO has with regard to informing alien sex offenders of their 

registration requirements was omitted because ICE considered it to be FOUO.
 

Page 15 GAO-13-832 Sex Offenders 

SORNA states that, shortly before the release of the sex offender from 

custody for the offense giving rise to the duty to register, an appropriate 

official must inform the sex offender of that person’s duties under 

SORNA, which would include registration, and explain those duties.28

ICE-ERO’s efforts are positive steps that should help address the 

uncertainty as to whether SORNA requirements to notify sex offenders of 

their duty to register apply to ICE-ERO. However, ICE-ERO began its 

review 4 years ago and has not identified a deadline for when it will 

finalize its decision on use of the Form I-220B addendum for providing 

sex offender registration notifications. Standard practices for project 

management state that managing a project, such as ICE-ERO’s review, 

involves developing a timeline with milestone dates.

According to SMART officials, other law enforcement agencies, including 

state correctional and probation agencies, have information and 

notification processes, even though the agencies are sometimes not 

explicitly required to do so by law. SMART officials said that these 

agencies have taken these actions in part because of an overall 

responsibility to assist other law enforcement when possible. 

29 A deadline would 

help ensure timely completion of ICE-ERO’s review of the Form I-220B 

addendum, which is important because until the review is complete, there 

will continue to be uncertainty as to whether and how ICE-ERO should be 

notifying alien sex offenders who are released under order of supervision 

of their duty to register.

 

2842 U.S.C. § 16917.

29 Project Management Institute’s The Standard for Program Management©.
 

Page 16 GAO-13-832 Sex Offenders 

ICE-ERO also does not notify sex offender registry and law enforcement 

officials when an alien sex offender is removed from the country or 

released under supervision, in part because ICE-ERO officials stated that 

the extent to which ICE-ERO has the authority or responsibility to do so is 

questionable.30

Sex offender registry and local law enforcement officials that we 

contacted in the three states in our review said that the officials are not 

always aware of when ICE-ERO removes alien sex offenders or releases 

them under ICE-ERO supervision.

These officials also stated that contacting local 

jurisdictions would require significant field office resources and 

modifications to deportation officer duties.

31

In addition, local law enforcement and state registry officials from two of 

three states we reviewed and officials from a U.S. Marshals Service field 

As a result, the officials are not able 

to ensure that these offenders are registered or that their registration 

information is current. Sex offender registry and law enforcement officials 

from two states said that, for alien sex offenders who they know are in 

ICE custody, the officials typically contact ICE on their own initiative to 

ask about the status of these offenders. Sex offender registry officials in 

another state said that even though they have an ICE agent colocated 

with them, the agent does not consistently inform them when ICE deports 

or releases an alien sex offender, in part because the agent has other 

responsibilities and notifying the state registry of the status of alien sex 

offenders in ICE custody is a collateral duty. These registry officials said 

that they typically become aware of an alien sex offender who has been 

released from ICE custody if (1) the offender registers with local law 

enforcement officials on the offender’s own initiative, (2) the offender’s 

probation officer notifies them, or (3) they check on the status of the 

offender—as they routinely do—and determine that the offender has 

absconded.

 

30 Information about additional steps that ICE has taken, or could take, to determine what, 

if any, responsibility ICE-ERO has with regard to informing alien sex offenders of their 

registration requirements was omitted because ICE considered it to be FOUO.

31These three states are Minnesota, Florida, and Maryland. We chose Minnesota and 

Florida because they are among the states where the largest number of alien sex 

offenders in our sample who were not in the public website reside. We chose Maryland 

because local law enforcement officials had raised concerns about not being notified of 

alien sex offenders who are removed from the country or released under order of ICEERO supervision.

ICE-ERO Does Not Notify 

Relevant Sex Offender 

Registry and Law 

Enforcement Officials 

When an Alien Sex 

Offender Is Removed or 

Released under 

Supervision
 

Page 17 GAO-13-832 Sex Offenders 

office stated that they know of instances—although they were not able to 

provide the specific number—when they expended resources searching 

for an alien sex offender who they thought had absconded only to find 

that ICE-ERO had the offender in custody, removed the offender, or 

released the offender. Officials from another local law enforcement 

agency said that ICE should notify the state registry of the alien sex 

offenders in ICE custody so that state and local law enforcement officials 

are aware of the location of the alien sex offenders and do not expend 

resources looking for them. State registry and local law enforcement 

officials in our review also provided examples of how their lack of 

awareness about removed alien sex offenders, in particular, could pose a 

risk to public safety. For example, registry officials in one state said that 

there have been instances when they were not aware that an alien sex 

offender had been removed from the country until the sex offender 

subsequently returned to the United States, committed another offense, 

and ended up back in the state criminal justice system. Local law 

enforcement officials from another state described an instance in which 

they were not aware that an alien sex offender had been removed from 

the country until the offender returned to the United States and was 

subsequently arrested for committing another sex offense against the 

same child that he had previously victimized. According to the data that 

ICE-ERO provided to us, of the 4,359 alien sex offenders who were 

removed from the country between January and August 2012, 220 of 

them (5 percent) had previously been removed but subsequently returned 

to the United States and were arrested for another offense. As we 

reported in February 2013, the FBI is in the process of developing a 

mechanism by which the U.S. Marshals Service and relevant jurisdiction 

officials will be notified when a sex offender who has been registered in 

the United States legally reenters the country.32

Federal law states that BOP and federal probation officers are to notify 

the jurisdiction in which the sex offender will reside that the offender has 

been released.33

 

32See 

The law does not specify that ICE is required to do so; 

however, the state registry and local law enforcement officials in the three 

states included in our review said that, from their perspective, the best 

GAO-13-200 for a description of the process by which state registry and local law 

enforcement officials will be notified when a sex offender who has been registered in the 

United States enters the country. 

3318 U.S.C. § 4042(c).
 

Page 18 GAO-13-832 Sex Offenders 

way to ensure that they are aware of alien sex offenders whom ICE-ERO 

has in custody, removed from the country, or released under supervision 

is for ICE-ERO to tell the officials.

ICE-ERO plans to review options to help address notification gaps 

pertaining to alien sex offenders who are released under order of 

supervision, but has not established a deadline for when it will complete 

this review. ICE-ERO, however, does not plan to consider options for 

notifying jurisdictions when an alien sex offender is removed from the 

country, which, as discussed previously, could have an impact on a 

jurisdiction’s ability to monitor these individuals if they return to the United 

States.

As a result of our review, in May 2013, officials from ICE-ERO, the U.S. 

Marshals Service, and the SMART Office met to discuss notification gaps 

with regard to registration of alien sex offenders and options for 

addressing these gaps. However, the agencies were not able to agree to 

a solution at that time, in part because of ICE-ERO officials’ concerns 

about their organization’s lack of authority and responsibility regarding 

sex offender registration. Officials we interviewed from the U.S. Marshals 

Service and the SMART Office stated that ICE-ERO was in the best 

position to inform alien sex offenders about potential registration 

requirements, and to notify relevant jurisdiction officials—either state 

registry or law enforcement officials—when an alien sex offender is 

removed from the country or released, because ICE-ERO is the last 

federal agency that has had contact with these offenders and releases 

these offenders from custody into the community.

However, in addition to uncertainty regarding ICE-ERO’s authority and 

responsibility, ICE-ERO officials identified other concerns about providing 

these notifications. Specifically, officials we interviewed in the five ICEERO field offices included in our review said that because they are 

responsible for supervising such a large number of aliens—anywhere 

from 750 to 3,000 at any point in time—they would not have the time or 

resources to notify jurisdiction officials when an alien sex offender is 

released or removed from the country. However, as noted previously, 

alien sex offenders make up a relatively small fraction (5 percent) of 

aliens under ICE supervision, in which case providing these notifications 

may not pose a significant resource burden on ICE-ERO. Further, ICEERO officials as well as one of the five ICE-ERO field offices in our review 

said that they thought that, to notify jurisdiction officials, they would first 

have to confirm that the alien does in fact have to register in that state, 

ICE-ERO Plans to Review 

Notification Options for 

Offenders under 

Supervision, but Has Not 

Set a Deadline for Doing 

So, and Does Not Plan to 

Consider Options for 

Removed Offenders
 

Page 19 GAO-13-832 Sex Offenders 

which could be very time-consuming. However, under SORNA, the state 

is responsible for determining whether a convicted sex offender is 

required to register, in which case ICE-ERO would not have to do so prior 

to providing notice of the offender’s release.

ICE-ERO officials also stated that SORNA also requires individuals 

convicted of certain crimes against children that are not sex offenses—

such as kidnapping—to register as sex offenders. However, these 

officials explained that it would be difficult for deportation officers to 

determine whether aliens under their supervision were convicted of a 

crime that is not a sex offense but may require registration. We 

acknowledge that this could be a challenge and an issue that the SMART 

Office may be able to help ICE-ERO resolve. Moreover, officials from all 

five ICE-ERO field offices in our review said that even if they informed 

alien sex offenders of their registration requirements, the officials would 

not be able to take any action to enforce these requirements even when 

registering as a sex offender is a condition of release for aliens under 

ICE-ERO supervision. However, ICE-ERO could notify all offenders who 

are released on supervision, as it does for offenders who are removed 

from the country, and then state and local law enforcement would be 

responsible for enforcing registration requirements. Also, if ICE-ERO 

notifies jurisdiction officials of the offender’s release, these officials would 

be able to identify those offenders who did not register after their release; 

ICE-ERO would not have to assume this responsibility. Finally, officials 

from two ICE-ERO field offices in our review said that they would not 

know who, specifically, to contact at the state registry to notify it that ICEERO is deporting or releasing an alien sex offender. However, the 

SMART Office maintains points of contact for each state, territory, and 

tribal sex offender registration agency, which the SMART Office could 

provide to ICE-ERO.

In July 2013, an ICE-ERO official stated that ICE-ERO will begin 

reviewing options to accomplish the goal of sex offender notification, to 

include efforts to inform alien sex offenders of their potential registration 

requirements and to notify jurisdictions of alien sex offenders who are 

released under order of supervision. However, ICE-ERO did not provide a 

deadline for when it plans to complete its review of the various options. 

Standard practices for project management state that managing a project, 

such as ICE-ERO’s review, involves developing a timeline with milestone 
 

Page 20 GAO-13-832 Sex Offenders 

dates.34 Further, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal 

Government call for agencies to ensure that there are adequate means of 

communicating with, and obtaining information from, external 

stakeholders that may have a significant impact on the agency achieving 

its goals.35

Although ICE-ERO plans to address notification gaps regarding alien sex 

offenders under order of supervision, it does not plan to consider options 

for notifying relevant jurisdictions when an alien sex offender is removed 

from the country. ICE-ERO stated that it already updates NCIC—which is 

routinely accessed by law enforcement officials—when an alien sex 

offender is removed, including the date of the removal. However, if law 

enforcement officials were last told that the alien sex offender was in ICEERO custody, they may not have a reason to search NCIC to determine 

the status of the offenders. Given the threat that alien sex offenders who 

are removed from and return to the United States may pose to public 

safety, developing an appropriate mechanism for informing relevant 

jurisdictions when an alien sex offender has been removed from the 

country will assist jurisdiction officials in ensuring that all alien sex 

offenders have been registered. This will facilitate the monitoring of these 

sex offenders in the event that they return to the United States. Such 

notification would also prevent jurisdictions from spending limited 

resources trying to locate these offenders because they were not aware 

that the offenders had been removed from the country. Other federal 

agencies, including the SMART Office, U.S. Marshals Service, and BOP, 

may have resources and information that are useful for ICE-ERO in 

developing a mechanism for notifying relevant jurisdictions when an alien 

sex offender is removed from the country. For example, SMART 

By developing a deadline for when it will complete its 

assessment of options for providing notifications to and about alien sex 

offenders, ICE-ERO will help to ensure that any public safety concerns 

that may arise as a result of the current notification gaps—such as law 

enforcement officials being unaware of sex offenders living in their 

jurisdictions—are mitigated in a timely manner. Finally, communicating 

the results of its assessment with federal stakeholders will help provide 

clarity going forward with regard to who has responsibility for notifying 

alien sex offenders of their potential registration requirements.

 

34 Project Management Institute’s The Standard for Program Management© .

35Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government, GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1

(Washington, D.C: Nov. 1, 1999)
 

Page 21 GAO-13-832 Sex Offenders 

maintains contact information for all state, territorial, and tribal registry 

agencies. Also, internal control standards call for agencies to ensure that 

there are adequate means of communicating with, and obtaining 

information from, external stakeholders that may have a significant impact 

on the agency’s achieving its goals.36 Therefore, consulting with these 

agencies could be beneficial for ICE-ERO in developing this notification 

mechanism.

Without mechanisms in place to consistently inform alien sex offenders 

who are released under ICE-ERO supervision about their registration 

requirements, and consistently notify jurisdictions when an alien sex 

offender has been removed from the country or released under 

supervision, the risk that alien sex offenders will reside in U.S. 

communities without being registered is increased. ICE-ERO is in the 

process of a review to determine whether continued use of the Form I220B addendum as a means to notify alien sex offenders of their potential 

registration requirements is warranted; however, ICE-ERO has not set a 

deadline for timely completion of this review. A deadline will help enhance 

accountability for completion of this effort, which is important because

until this review is completed, there will continue to be uncertainty as to 

whether and how ICE-ERO should be notifying alien sex offenders who 

are released under order of supervision of their duty to register. In 

addition, a time frame for when ICE-ERO will complete its assessment of 

options for notifying alien sex offenders of their potential registration 

requirements will help provide accountability for completing this important 

effort. Also, communicating the results of ICE-ERO’s assessment with 

federal stakeholders will help provide clarity going forward with regard to 

who has responsibility for notifying alien sex offenders of their potential 

registration requirements. Moreover, given the threat that alien sex 

offenders who are removed from and return to the United States may 

pose to public safety, developing an appropriate mechanism for informing 

relevant jurisdictions when an alien sex offender has been removed will 

assist jurisdiction officials in ensuring that all alien sex offenders are 

registered. This will facilitate the monitoring of these sex offenders in the 

event that they return to the United States. Such notification would also 

prevent jurisdictions from spending limited resources trying to locate 

 

36GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1. 

Conclusions
 

Page 22 GAO-13-832 Sex Offenders 

these offenders because they were not aware that the offenders had 

been removed from the country.

We recommend that the Director of ICE take the following two actions:

• direct ICE-ERO to establish a deadline to ensure timely completion of 

its review of the Form I-220B addendum and

• direct ICE-ERO to establish a deadline for when it will complete its 

assessment of options for informing alien sex offenders who are 

released under order of supervision about their potential responsibility 

to register and communicate the results of its assessment with federal 

stakeholders.

We recommend that the Secretary of Homeland Security direct ICE-ERO, 

in consultation with the SMART Office, the U.S. Marshals Service, and 

BOP, to develop an appropriate mechanism for notifying relevant 

jurisdictions when an alien sex offender has been removed from the 

country.

We provided a draft of this report for review and comment to DHS and 

DOJ. We received written comments from DHS, which are reproduced in 

full in appendix III. DHS agreed with our recommendations in its 

comments. We also received technical comments from DHS and DOJ, 

which are incorporated throughout our report as appropriate.

DHS agreed with our recommendations that ICE-ERO establish deadlines 

for when it will complete its review of the Form I-220B addendum and its 

assessment of options for informing alien sex offenders who are released 

under order of supervision about their potential registration 

responsibilities. DHS noted that ICE-ERO had taken steps to combine 

Form I-220A (Order of Release on Recognizance) and Form I-220B 

(Order of Supervision) into one comprehensive Form I-220 (Order of 

Release on Recognizance or Order of Supervision). However, ICE-ERO 

intentionally delayed publication of this new form, and the associated 

directive, to take into account any recommendations resulting from our 

review. DHS also stated that ICE-ERO is currently working with the 

SMART Office to explore ways in which the goals of SORNA may be 

better addressed through improved coordination between the two 

agencies. ICE-ERO plans to complete its review and assessment by 

October 31, 2013. Establishing such a deadline for the completion of 

these efforts will help ensure that ICE-ERO can be held accountable for 

Recommendations for 

Executive Action

Agency Comments 

and Our Evaluation
 

Page 23 GAO-13-832 Sex Offenders 

identifying and effectuating any actions they deem appropriate to help 

ensure that alien sex offenders are indeed registered. As part of our 

process for following up on agencies’ efforts to implement our 

recommendations, we will continue to monitor ICE-ERO’s progress in 

completing its assessment and review by the established deadline.

DHS also concurred with our recommendation that ICE-ERO, in 

consultation with the SMART Office, the U.S. Marshals Service, and 

BOP, develop an appropriate mechanism for notifying relevant 

jurisdictions when an alien sex offender has been removed from the 

country. DHS noted, however, that as ICE-ERO considers options, it will 

also determine whether such notification can be accomplished without 

adversely affecting ICE’s mission, given the potential impact on 

resources. ICE-ERO also plans to complete its assessment of these 

options by October 31, 2013. Notifying jurisdictions when an alien sex 

offender is removed from the country will enable them to register these 

offenders, in which case law enforcement officials will be able to monitor 

these offenders if they ever return to the United States.

We are sending copies of this report to the appropriate congressional 

committees, the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Attorney General of 

the United States, and other interested parties. In addition, the report is 

available at no charge on the GAO web-site at http://www.gao.gov. 

If you or your staff have any questions, please contact me at (202) 512-

8777 or larencee@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of 

Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page 

of this report. GAO staff who made significant contributions to this report 

are listed in appendix IV.

Eileen R. Larence

Director, Homeland Security and Justice 
 

Page 24 GAO-13-832 Sex Offenders 

List of Requesters

The Honorable Charles E. Grassley

Ranking Member

Committee on the Judiciary

United States Senate

The Honorable Christopher H. Smith

Chairman

Subcommittee on Africa, Global Human Rights, and International 

Organizations

Committee on Foreign Affairs

House of Representatives

The Honorable F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr.

Chairman

The Honorable Robert C. “Bobby” Scott

Ranking Member

Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and

 Investigations

Committee on the Judiciary

House of Representatives
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 25 GAO-13-832 Sex Offenders 

This report addresses the following objectives:

(1) To what extent are alien sex offenders under the Enforcement and 

Removal Operations division of U.S. Immigration and Customs 

Enforcement (ICE-ERO) order of supervision registered as sex 

offenders?

(2) To what extent are alien sex offenders who are removed from the 

country or released under an ICE-ERO order of supervision informed of 

registration requirements, and state sex offender registry and law 

enforcement officials notified about these offenders?

To address our objectives, we requested that ICE-ERO provide the 

names and dates of birth for all alien sex offenders who were under 

orders of supervision as of September 2012. We chose this date because 

we requested this information as part of a separate review and this date 

provided us with current information at the time.1 ICE-ERO provided us 

with the names for 2,837 alien sex offenders under orders of supervision 

as of September 2012. However, ICE-ERO was able to provide us only 

with a complete date of birth—which is important for verifying the identity 

of these individuals—for 1,369 of these alien offenders.2 We drew a 

random probability sample of 137 of the 1,369 alien sex offenders with 

complete dates of birth. We subsequently found that six individuals in our 

sample should not have been included in the population of alien sex 

offenders under supervision, resulting in a final sample size of 131 and an 

estimated total population of 1,309.3

 

1

GAO, Sharing More Information Will Enable Federal Agencies to Improve Notifications of 

Sex Offenders’ International Travel, 

We determined whether each alien 

sex offender, as of March 2013, was registered in the state where he or 

she resides using the steps described below. Percentage estimates 

derived from this sample have margins of error at the 95 percent 

GAO-13-200 (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 14, 2013). 

2

ICE-ERO officials explained that the date of birth is not available for all aliens under ICEERO supervision because date of birth is not a required field in ICE’s case management 

system. 

3

Because we found individuals in our sample who should have been excluded from the 

population, we used the number of these individuals to statistically estimate the true size 

of the population of relevant individuals.

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology 
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 26 GAO-13-832 Sex Offenders 

confidence level of plus or minus 8.08 percentage points.4

To determine whether the 131 alien sex offenders in our sample were 

registered in the states where they reside, we first searched the National 

Sex Offender Public Website (public website) to determine which of these 

offenders were included. All persons included on the public website are 

also registered with their respective states. On the basis of the search 

results, we divided the alien sex offenders into three categories: (1) 

definitely included in the public website, meaning there was an exact 

match on the name and date of birth for the alien sex offender in the 

public website; (2) possibly included in the public website, meaning there 

was a partial or similar name, date of birth, or age in the public website 

(e.g., J. Smith as opposed to John Smith), but not an exact match; and 

(3) definitely not included in the public website, meaning the public 

website did not include the offender’s exact name or date of birth or even 

a partial or similar name, date of birth, or age. We determined that of the 

131 alien sex offenders in our sample, 51 (39 percent) were definitely 

included in the public website, 16 (12 percent) were possibly included, 

and 64 (49 percent) were definitely not included. We asked ICE-ERO to 

provide us with the current addresses for the 80 alien sex offenders who 

were possibly included or definitely not included in the public website; 

these offenders were located in 27 states. We contacted sex offender 

registration officials in each of the 27 states to ask whether the officials 

were aware of these offenders; whether the offenders were registered 

with the state; and, for any offenders who were not registered, an 

explanation for why they were not.

We assessed 

the reliability of the data ICE provided by questioning knowledgeable 

agency officials and reviewing the data for errors and anomalies. We 

determined that the data were sufficiently reliable for our purposes.

To address our second objective, we reviewed the Sex Offender 

Registration and Notification Act of 2006 (SORNA), other applicable laws, 

and guidelines developed by the Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, 

Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking (SMART) Office to obtain 

 

4

Because we followed a probability procedure based on random selection, our sample is 

only one of a large number of samples that we might have drawn. Since each sample 

could have provided different estimates, we express our confidence in the precision of our 

particular sample’s results as a 95 percent confidence interval (e.g., plus or minus 8.08 

percentage points). This is the interval that would contain the actual population value for 

95 percent of the samples we could have drawn. 
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 27 GAO-13-832 Sex Offenders 

information on federal sex offender registration requirements. We also 

met with officials from ICE-ERO Executive Information and Reporting 

Unit—which is responsible for administering and coordinating ICE-ERO’s 

policy development, review, clearance, and information disclosure 

functions—to obtain information on how they determine whether an alien 

in ICE-ERO custody is a sex offender and any actions they take to help 

ensure that alien sex offenders who are released under ICE-ERO 

supervision are registered. In addition, we conducted phone interviews 

with ICE-ERO supervisory detention officials; U.S. Marshals Service 

officials; state sex offender registry officials; and local law enforcement 

officials in Minnesota, Florida, and Maryland to inquire about actions they 

take to help ensure alien sex offenders are registered and how they 

become aware of alien sex offenders who live in their jurisdiction. We 

selected Minnesota and Florida because these are the states where the 

largest number of alien sex offenders in our sample who were not 

included in the public website reside. We selected Maryland because 

local law enforcement officials in this state had raised concerns about 

registration of alien sex offenders during our prior work, which was 

completed in February 2013.5

 

5

GAO, Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act: Jurisdictions Face Challenges to 

Implementing the Act, and Stakeholders Report Positive and Negative Effects, 

In addition, we conducted phone interviews 

with ICE-ERO field office directors and deputy directors in the field offices 

that either released or currently supervise the alien sex offenders in our 

sample who were not registered, but potentially should have been. We 

obtained information from the Administrative Office of the United States 

Courts and the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) regarding their efforts to 

inform alien sex offenders about their registration responsibilities and 

notifying relevant sex offender registry and law enforcement officials 

about these offenders. In addition, we interviewed officials from the U.S. 

Marshals Service who are responsible for locating sex offenders who fail 

to register. We also met with the director and policy advisors for the 

SMART Office within the Department of Justice (DOJ) to obtain their 

perspectives on acceptable reasons for why alien sex offenders may not 

be registered in the state where they reside or included in the public 

website. The SMART Office is responsible for assessing states’, 

territories’, and tribes’ progress in implementing SORNA. We compared 

the sex offender notification requirements in SORNA and other federal 

statutes with the notifications that state and federal agencies provide to 

alien sex offenders to determine if there were any gaps. We then 

GAO-13-211 (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 7, 2013).
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 28 GAO-13-832 Sex Offenders 

obtained perspectives from the federal, state, and local officials we 

interviewed on how best to address these gaps. We also compared 

efforts that ICE-ERO has under way regarding notifications to and about 

alien sex offenders with internal control standards pertaining to 

communication with stakeholders and program management standards 

that involve establishing milestone dates and deadlines.6

We conducted this performance audit from January 2013 to September

2013 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing 

standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to 

obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence for our findings and conclusions 

based on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained 

provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on 

our audit objectives.

 

6

GAO, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government, GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1

(Washington, D.C.: November 1999), and the Project Management Institute’s The 

Standard for Program Management (Newton Square, PA © 2006). 
Appendix II: Sex Offender Notification 

Requirements in the Sex Offender Registration 

and Notification Act (SORNA) and Other 

Federal Statutes

Page 29 GAO-13-832 Sex Offenders 

Type of notification Notification requirement

Informing sex offender of registration 

requirements

42 USC § 16917—Duty to notify sex offenders of registration requirements and to register

(a) In General.

An appropriate official shall, shortly before release of the sex offender from custody, or, if 

the sex offender is not in custody, immediately after the sentencing of the sex offender, for 

the offense giving rise to the duty to register— 

(1) inform the sex offender of the duties of a sex offender under this title and explain 

those duties;

(2) require the sex offender to read and sign a form stating that the duty to register has 

been explained and that the offender understands the registration requirement; and

(3) ensure that the sex offender is registered.

(b) Notification of Sex Offenders Who Cannot Comply with Subsection (a).

The Attorney General shall prescribe rules for the notification of sex offenders who cannot 

be registered in accordance with subsection (a).

Notifying state registry and local law 

enforcement officials about the 

release of a sex offender

18 USC § 4042(c)(1)-(3)—Duties of Bureau of Prisons

(c) Notice of Sex Offender Release— 

(1) In the case of a person described in paragraph (3), or any other person in a category 

specified by the Attorney General, who is released from prison or sentenced to probation, 

notice shall be provided to— 

(A) the chief law enforcement officer of each State, tribal, and local jurisdiction in 

which the person will reside; and

(B) a State, tribal, or local agency responsible for the receipt or maintenance of sex 

offender registration information in the State, tribal, or local jurisdiction in which the 

person will reside.

(2) Notice provided under paragraph (1) shall include the information described in subsection 

(b)(2), the place where the person will reside, and the information that the person shall register 

as required by the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act. For a person who is released 

from the custody of the Bureau of Prisons whose expected place of residence following release 

is known to the Bureau of Prisons, notice shall be provided at least 5 days prior to release by 

the Director of the Bureau of Prisons. For a person who is sentenced to probation, notice shall 

be provided promptly by the probation officer responsible for the supervision of the person, or in 

a manner specified by the Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts. 

Notice concerning a subsequent change of residence by a person described in paragraph (3) 

during any period of probation, supervised release, or parole shall also be provided to the 

agencies and officers specified in paragraph (1) by the probation officer responsible for the 

supervision of the person, or in a manner specified by the Director of the Administrative Office 

of the United States Courts.

(3) The Director of the Bureau of Prisons shall inform a person who is released from prison and 

required to register under the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act of the 

requirements of that Act as they apply to that person and the same information shall be 

provided to a person sentenced to probation by the probation officer responsible for supervision 

of that person. 

Source: Sex offender Registration and Notification Act of 2006 (SORNA), 42 USC § 16917, and 18 USC § 4042©(1)-(3)

Appendix II: Sex Offender Notification 

Requirements in the Sex Offender 

Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) 

and Other Federal Statutes
Appendix III: Comments from the Department 

of Homeland Security

Page 30 GAO-13-832 Sex Offenders 

Appendix III: Comments from the 

Department of Homeland Security
Appendix III: Comments from the Department 

of Homeland Security

Page 31 GAO-13-832 Sex Offenders 
Page 32 GAO-13-832 Sex Offenders 

Eileen R. Larence, 202-512-8777 or larencee@gao.gov

In addition to the contact named above, Kristy Love, Assistant Director, 

and Edith Sohna, analyst-in-charge, managed this engagement. Kevin 

Craw and Frances Cook made significant contributions to the report. 

Michele Fejfar, Justin Fisher, Mary Catherine Hult, Michael Lenington, 

Linda Miller, Lara Miklozek, and Julie Spetz also provided valuable 

assistance.

Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments 

GAO Contact

Staff 

Acknowledgments

(441179)
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.

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

cost is through GAO’s website (http://www.gao.gov). Each weekday 

afternoon, GAO posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, 

and correspondence. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted 

products, go to http://www.gao.gov and select “E-mail Updates.”

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of 

production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the 

publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and 

white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s website, 

http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 

TDD (202) 512-2537. 

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, 

MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information.

Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, and YouTube. 

Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E-mail Updates. Listen to our Podcasts. 

Visit GAO on the web at www.gao.gov. 

Contact:

Website: http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

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

Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov, (202) 512-

4400, U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 

7125, Washington, DC 20548

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800

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

Washington, DC 20548

GAO’s Mission

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

Order by Phone

Connect with GAO

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Congressional 

Relations

Public Affairs

Please Print on Recycled Paper.