Employment Verification: Challenges Exist in Implementing a Mandatory Electronic Employment Verification System
Published: 2008-05-06T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: In 1996, the former U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service, now within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and the Social Security Administration (SSA) began operating a voluntary pilot program, recently named the E-Verify program, to provide participating employers with a means for electronically verifying employees' work eligibility. Legislation has been introduced in Congress to require all employers to electronically verify the work authorization status of their employees. In this testimony GAO provides observations on the E-Verify system's capacity and costs, options for reducing delays and improving efficiency in the verification process, ability to detect fraudulent documents and identity theft, and vulnerability to employer fraud and misuse. This testimony is based on GAO's products issued from August 2005 through June 2007 and updated information obtained from DHS and SSA in April 2008. We analyzed data on employer use, E-Verify guidance, and other reports on the employment verification process, as well as legislative proposals and regulations.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: A mandatory E-Verify program would necessitate an increased capacity at both U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and SSA to accommodate the estimated 7.4 million employers in the United States. According to USCIS, as of April 2008, more than 61,000 employers have registered for E-Verify, and about half are active users. Although DHS has not prepared official cost figures, USCIS officials estimated that a mandatory E-Verify program could cost a total of about $765 million for fiscal years 2009 through 2012 if only newly hired employees are queried through the program and about $838 million over the same 4-year period if both newly hired and current employees are queried. USCIS has estimated that it would need additional staff for a mandatory E-Verify program, but was not yet able to provide estimates for its staffing needs. SSA has estimated that implementation of a mandatory E-Verify program would cost a total of about $281 million and require hiring 700 new employees for a total of 2,325 additional workyears for fiscal years 2009 through 2013. USCIS and SSA are exploring options to reduce delays and improve efficiency in the E-Verify process. The majority of E-Verify queries entered by employers--about 92 percent--confirm within seconds that the employee is work-authorized. About 7 percent of the queries cannot be immediately confirmed as work authorized by SSA, and about 1 percent cannot be immediately confirmed as work authorized by USCIS because employees' information queried through the system does not match information in SSA or DHS databases. The majority of SSA erroneous tentative nonconfirmations occur because employees' citizenship or other information, such as name changes, is not up to date in the SSA database, generally because individuals do not request that SSA make these updates. USCIS and SSA are planning to implement initiatives to help address these weaknesses and reduce delays. E-Verify may help employers detect fraudulent documents thereby reducing such fraud, but it cannot yet fully address identity fraud issues, for example when employees present genuine documents that may be stolen. USCIS has added a photograph screening tool to E-Verify through which an employer verifies the authenticity of certain documents, such as an employment authorization document, by matching the photograph on the document with the photograph in DHS databases. USCIS is exploring options to expand this tool to include other forms of documentation, such as passports, with databases that store photographic information, but these efforts are in the planning stages and require decisions about data sharing and privacy issues. E-Verify is vulnerable to acts of employer fraud and misuse, such as employers limiting employees' pay during the E-Verify process. USCIS has established a branch to review employers' use of E-Verify. In addition, information suggesting employers' fraud or misuse can be useful to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in targeting worksite enforcement resources. USCIS and ICE are negotiating a memorandum of understanding to define roles and responsibilities for sharing information.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: I appreciate the opportunity to be here today to participate in this hearing  on electronic employment verification. As we and others have reported in  the past, the opportunity for employment is one of the most powerful  magnets attracting unauthorized immigrants to the United States. To help  address this issue, in 1986 Congress passed the Immigration Reform and  Control Act (IRCA), which made it illegal for individuals and entities to  knowingly hire, continue to employ, or recruit or refer for a fee  unauthorized workers. The act established a two-pronged approach for  helping to limit the employment of unauthorized workers: (1) an  employment verification process through which employers verify all newly  hired employees’ work eligibility and (2) a sanctions program for fining  employers who do not comply with the act.
Following the passage of IRCA, the U.S. Commission on Immigration  Reform and various immigration experts indicated a number of problems  with the implementation of immigration policies and concluded that  deterring illegal immigration requires, among other things, strategies  involving a more reliable employment eligibility verification process that  focuses on disrupting the ability of illegal immigrants to gain employment.  In particular, the commission report and other studies found that the  single most important step that could be taken to reduce unlawful  migration is the development of a more effective system for verifying work  authorization. In the over 20 years since passage of IRCA, the employment  eligibility verification process has remained largely unchanged. Legislation  has been introduced in Congress to reform immigration laws and  strengthen electronic employment verification.  Some of this legislation  includes proposals that would require employers to use a mandatory,  functional electronic employment verification program for verifying the  work authorization of all newly hired employees.  Some of these proposals  would also require employers to use an electronic employment verification  program to verify the work authorization status of existing employees.  In  addition, some proposals would provide sanctions for employers who do  not use electronic verification to verify the work authorization status of  employees equivalent to sanctions for employers who do not comply with  the employment verification process established by IRCA.
Currently, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), a  component within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in  conjunction with the Social Security Administration (SSA), operates a  voluntary electronic employment verification program, called E-Verify.  While participation in this program remains voluntary, some states are  moving to require all employers in the state to verify newly hired  employees using E-Verify.  For example, as of January 1, 2008, the “Legal  Arizona Workers Act” requires all employers in Arizona to verify the  employment eligibility of newly hired employees through the E-Verify  program.  This act also provides civil penalties, including the possible  suspension or permanent revocation of all Arizona business licenses, for  employers who are found to intentionally or knowingly employ an  unauthorized alien.  In 2008, Mississippi passed the “Mississippi  Employment Protection Act,” under which the state will phase in  mandatory newly hired employee eligibility verification with E-Verify for  all employers between July 1, 2008, and July 1, 2011.  Other states,  including Idaho, Minnesota, Rhode Island, and Oklahoma require  employers in certain sectors, such as government employers and  contractors, to verify their employees’ work authorization status.
My testimony today is an update of our prior work regarding employment  verification and worksite enforcement.  Specifically, I will discuss our  observations on the E-Verify program’s capacity and costs, options for  reducing delays and improving efficiency in the verification process,  ability to detect fraudulent documents and identity theft, and vulnerability  to employer fraud and misuse.
In preparing this testimony, we reviewed our past work on employment  verification and worksite enforcement efforts.  In April 2008, we updated  information from our past work.  Specifically, we analyzed updated  information provided by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement  (ICE), USCIS, and SSA officials on the E-Verify program and challenges  their agencies may face if an electronic employment verification program  were made mandatory. We examined legislative proposals, regulations,  guidance, and other studies on the employment verification process. We  also analyzed a report on the results of an independent evaluation of the E- Verify program, then known as the Basic Pilot program, issued by Westat  Corporation, a contractor evaluating the program, in September 2007. We  reviewed the scope and methodology used by Westat in conducting the  evaluation and, based on this review, found that the report findings were  sufficiently reliable to provide a general indication of the types of ways in  which employers have used the program. Furthermore, we received  updated data on employer use of the current electronic employment  eligibility verification system. We reviewed these data for accuracy and  completeness and determined that these data were sufficiently reliable for  the purposes of our review. We conducted these performance audits and  our 2008 update in accordance with generally accepted government  auditing standards.  Those standards require that we plan and perform the  audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable  basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.  We  believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our  findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.
subsections: section_title: Background
paragraphs: In 1986, IRCA established the employment verification process based on  employers’ review of documents presented by employees to prove identity  and work eligibility. On the Form I-9, employees must attest that they are  U.S. citizens, lawfully admitted permanent residents, or aliens authorized  to work in the United States. Employers must then certify that they have  reviewed the documents presented by their employees to establish identity  and work eligibility and that the documents appear genuine and relate to  the individual presenting them. In making their certifications, employers  are expected to judge whether the documents presented are obviously  counterfeit or fraudulent. Employers are required to retain the Form I-9  and provide it, upon request, to officers of the Departments of Homeland  Security and Labor and the Department of Justice’s Office of Special  Counsel for Immigration Related Unfair Employment Practices for  inspection. Employers generally are deemed in compliance with IRCA if  they have followed the Form I-9 process, including when an unauthorized  alien presents fraudulent documents that appear genuine. Following the  passage of IRCA in 1986, employees could present 29 different documents  to establish their identity and/or work eligibility. In a 1997 interim rule, the  former U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) reduced the  number of acceptable work eligibility documents from 29 to 27.
The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act  (IIRIRA) of 1996 required the former INS and SSA to operate three  voluntary pilot programs to test electronic means for employers to verify  an employee’s eligibility to work, one of which was the Basic Pilot  Program. The Basic Pilot Program was designed to test whether pilot  verification procedures could improve the existing employment  verification process by reducing (1) false claims of U.S. citizenship and  document fraud, (2) discrimination against employees, (3) violations of  civil liberties and privacy, and (4) the burden on employers to verify  employees’ work eligibility.
In 2007, USCIS renamed the Basic Pilot Program the Employment  Eligibility Verification program and later in the year changed the name to  E-Verify.  E-Verify provides participating employers with an electronic  method to verify their employees’ work eligibility. Regardless of whether  employers participate voluntarily in E-Verify, they are still required to  complete Forms I-9 for all newly hired employees in accordance with  IRCA. After completing the forms, those employers participating in the  program query E-Verify’s automated system by entering employee  information provided on the forms, such as name and social security  number, into the E-Verify Web site within 3 days of the employee’s start  date. The program then electronically matches that information against  information in SSA’s Numident database and, if necessary, DHS databases  to determine whether the employee is eligible to work.  E-Verify  electronically notifies employers whether their employees’ work  authorization was confirmed. Those queries that the DHS automated  check cannot confirm are referred to USCIS staff, called immigration  status verifiers, who check employee information against information in  other DHS databases. The E-Verify program process is shown in figure 1.
In cases when E-Verify cannot confirm an employee’s work authorization  status either through the automatic check or the check by an immigration  status verifier, the system issues the employer a tentative nonconfirmation  of the employee's work authorization status. In this case, the employers  must notify the affected employees of the finding, and the employees have  the right to contest their tentative nonconfirmations by contacting SSA or  USCIS to resolve any inaccuracies in their records within 8 federal  working days. During this time, employers may not take any adverse  actions against those employees, such as limiting their work assignments  or pay. After 8 days, employers are required to either immediately  terminate the employment, or notify DHS of the continued employment, of  workers who do not successfully contest the tentative nonconfirmation  and those whom the program finds are not work-authorized.
The E-Verify program uses the same system as USCIS’s Systematic Alien  Verification for Entitlements Program, which provides a variety of  verification services for federal, state, and local government agencies.  USCIS estimates that more than 150,000 federal, state, and local agency  users verify immigration status through the Systematic Alien Verification  for Entitlements Program.  SSA also operates the Web-based Social  Security Number Verification Service, which employers can use to assure  that employees’ names and social security numbers match SSA’s records.  This service, designed to ensure accurate employer wage reporting, is  offered free of charge. Employer use is voluntary, and approximately  12,000 employers requested more than 25.7 million verifications in 2005,  according to the SSA Office of the Inspector General.
USCIS contracted for an independent evaluation of the E-Verify program.  Westat, the organization that conducted the evaluation, issued a report on  its evaluation findings in September 2007. According to this report, the  Westat evaluation examined how well the federal government  implemented modifications made to the original Basic Pilot Program and  the extent to which the program met its goals to (1) reduce employment of  unauthorized workers, (2) reduce discrimination, (3) protect employee  civil liberties and privacy, and (4) prevent undue burden on employers.  Based on its findings, Westat made recommendations to USCIS and SSA  intended to help improve the program.
section_title: Mandatory E-Verify Will Require an Increase in Capacity at USCIS and SSA
paragraphs: Mandatory electronic employment verification would substantially  increase the number of employers using the E-Verify program, which  would place greater demands on USCIS and SSA resources. As of April  2008, more than 61,000 employers have registered to use the program,  about 28,000 of whom were active users, according to USCIS. USCIS has  estimated that approximately 4,000 employers are registering per month.  In fiscal year 2007, USCIS processed about 3.2 million employer queries  and for the first 6 months of fiscal year 2008, processed about 2.6 million  queries. If participation in the E-Verify program were made mandatory, the  program would have to accommodate all of the estimated 7.4 million  employers in the United States. USCIS has projected that employers would  submit an average of 63 million queries on newly hired employees per year  under a mandatory E-Verify program. USCIS officials stated that they  have tested the capacity of the E-Verify computer system to handle about  four times the projected load of queries that would occur if E-Verify  participation were made mandatory for all employers. These tests showed  that the E-Verify system can process up to 240 million queries per year,  with the purchase of 5 additional servers, exceeding USCIS’s projection of  an average of 63 million queries per year under a mandatory E-Verify  program.
USCIS has developed cost and staffing estimates for operating a  mandatory E-Verify program. Although DHS has not prepared official cost  figures, USCIS officials estimated that a mandatory E-Verify program  could cost a total of about $765 million for fiscal years 2009 through 2012 if  only newly hired employees are queried through the program and about  $838 million over the same 4-year period if both newly hired and current  employees are queried. Mandatory implementation of E-Verify would also  require additional USCIS staff to administer the program, but USCIS was  not yet able to provide estimates for its staffing needs. Under the voluntary  program, USCIS operated E-Verify with 12 headquarters staff members in  2005, which has now grown to about 121 full-time employees nationwide,  with 21 staff members for monitoring and compliance and 11 for status  verification operations. According to USCIS, the agency would increase its  staffing level based on a formula that considers monitoring and  compliance and status verification staffing needs as the number of  employers using E-Verify increases.
A mandatory E-Verify program would also require an increase in SSA’s  resource and staffing requirements. SSA has estimated that  implementation of a mandatory E-Verify program would cost a total of  about $281 million for fiscal years 2009 through 2013 and require hiring  700 new employees for a total of 2,325 additional workyears over the same  5-year period. According to SSA, these estimates represent costs if the  current E-Verify system is expanded, and any changes to the current  process could have significant additional costs to the agency. The  estimates include costs for start-up, such as system upgrades, training for  current SSA employees, and training, space, and workstations for new  employees, and ongoing activities, such as field office visits and system  maintenance. SSA’s estimates assume that under a mandatory expansion  of the current E-Verify program, for every 100 E-Verify queries, about 1.4  individuals will contact SSA regarding a tentative nonconfirmation..  According to SSA officials, the cost of mandatory E-Verify would be driven  by the increased workload of its field office staff due to resolving SSA  tentative nonconfirmations, as well as some of the computer systems  improvements and upgrades that SSA would need to implement to address  the capacity of a federal mandatory program. Moreover, the final number  of new full-time staff required would depend on both the legislative  requirements for implementing mandatory E-Verify and the effectiveness  of efforts USCIS has underway to decrease the need for individuals to visit  SSA field offices.  SSA officials told us that SSA would need time and a  phased-in approach for implementation of a mandatory E-Verify program  in order to handle the increased workload for SSA field offices.
section_title: USCIS and SSA Are Implementing Plans to Reduce Delays and Improve Efficiency in the E-Verify Process
paragraphs: In prior work, we reported that secondary verifications lengthen the time  needed to complete the employment verification process. The majority of  E-Verify queries entered by employers—about 92 percent—confirm the  employee is authorized to work within seconds. About 7 percent of queries  are not confirmed by the initial automated check and result in SSA  tentative nonconfirmations, while about 1 percent result in DHS tentative  nonconfirmations. With regard to the SSA tentative nonconfirmations,  USCIS officials told us that the majority of erroneous tentative  nonconfirmations occur because employees’ citizenship status or other  information, such as name changes, is not up to date in the SSA database,  generally because individuals have not notified SSA of information  changes that occurred. SSA updates its records to reflect changes in  individuals’ information, such as citizenship status or name, when  individuals request that SSA make such updates. USCIS officials stated  that, for example, when aliens become naturalized citizens, their  citizenship status, updated in DHS databases, is not automatically updated  in the SSA database. When these individuals’ information is queried  through E-Verify, a tentative nonconfirmation would be issued because  under the current E-Verify process, those queries would only check  against SSA’s database; they would not automatically check against DHS’s  databases. Therefore, these individuals would have to go to an SSA field  office to correct their records in SSA’s database.
USCIS and SSA are planning to implement initiatives to help address SSA  tentative nonconfirmations, particularly those issued for naturalized  citizens, with a goal of reducing the need for employees to visit SSA field  offices. For example, in May 2008, USCIS plans to launch an initiative to  modify the electronic verification process so that employees whose  naturalized citizenship status cannot be confirmed by SSA will also be  checked against DHS’s databases. A query that could not be confirmed  by SSA would be automatically checked against DHS’s databases. If the  employee’s information matched information in DHS’s databases and the  databases showed that the person was a naturalized U.S. citizen, E-Verify  would confirm the employee as work authorized. USCIS and SSA intend  for this modification to enable USCIS to check naturalization status before  an SSA tentative nonconfirmation is issued as a result of the naturalized  citizen’s information not matching citizenship information in SSA’s  database. According to USCIS, this should help eliminate the need for the  employee who is a naturalized citizen to travel to an SSA field office  before being confirmed as work authorized. USCIS has projected that as it  implements this modification, the number of tentative nonconfirmations  should also be reduced. It remains to be seen by how much the number of  tentative nonconfirmations will be reduced as a result of this modification.  Furthermore, in May 2008 USCIS plans to modify the E-Verify process so  that naturalized citizens who receive a citizenship-related mismatch will  be able to call DHS directly to resolve this mismatch rather than having to  visit an SSA field office in-person to resolve the mismatch. In addition  USCIS and SSA are exploring options for updating SSA records with  naturalization information from DHS records.  Although this could help to  further reduce the number of SSA tentative nonconfirmations, USCIS and  SSA are still in the planning stages, and implementation of this initiative  may require significant policy and technical considerations, such as how  to link records in SSA and DHS databases that are stored according to  different identifiers.
USCIS and SSA are also implementing additional options to reduce delays  and improve the efficiency of the verification process. USCIS stated that it  is adding databases to the E-Verify program, increasing the number of  databases against which queries of employees’ information are checked.  For example, USCIS stated that it is incorporating real-time arrival data for  noncitizens from the Inter-Agency Border Inspection System (IBIS)  database, which tracks individuals, to help reduce the number of tentative  nonconfirmations issued for newly arrived noncitizens queried through E- Verify. SSA has also coordinated with USCIS to develop an automated  notification capability, known as the Employment Verification SSA  Tentative Nonconfirmation Automated Response (EV-STAR) system. This  system, available in all SSA field offices, became operational in October  2007 and allows SSA field office staff to view the same information that is  provided to employers through E-Verify. In addition, SSA field office staff  can notify the employer of the status of and any actions taken on the  employee’s record to resolve the tentative nonconfirmation and, through  EV-STAR, this information is directly updated in E-Verify.  USCIS and  SSA officials stated that EV-STAR has helped to reduce the burden on SSA,  employers, and employees in resolving SSA tentative nonconfirmations.  These efforts may help improve the efficiency of the verification process.  However, they will not entirely eliminate the need for some individuals to  visit SSA field offices to update their records, as USCIS and SSA efforts do  not address all types of changes that may occur in individuals’ information  and result in the issuance of tentative nonconfirmations, such as  individuals’ name changes.
section_title: USCIS has Identified Areas where E-Verify is Vulnerable to Fraud, but Proposed Actions Do Not Address All Types of Fraud and Raise Privacy Concerns
paragraphs: In our prior work, we reported that E-Verify enhances the ability of  participating employers to reliably verify their employees’ work  eligibility. The program also assists participating employers with  identification of false documents used to attempt to obtain employment.   When newly hired employees present false information, E-Verify will not  confirm the employees’ work eligibility because their information, such as  a false name or social security number, would not match SSA and DHS  databases.  However, the current E-Verify program cannot help employers  detect forms of identity fraud, such as cases in which an individual  presents genuine documents that are borrowed or stolen because the  system will verify an employee when the information entered matches  DHS and SSA records, even if the information belongs to another person.
USCIS has taken steps to reduce fraud associated with the use of genuine  documents in which the original photograph is substituted for another.  A  photograph screening tool was incorporated into E-Verify in September  2007 and is accessible for most employers registered to use E-Verify.  According to USCIS officials, the photograph screening tool is intended to  allow an employer to verify the authenticity of a lawful permanent resident  card (“green card”) or an employment authorization document, both of  which contain photographs of the document holder. As a part of the E- Verify program, the photograph screening tool is used in cases when an  employee presents a green card or employment authorization document to  prove his or her work eligibility. The employer then inputs the card  number into E-Verify, and the system then retrieves a copy of the  employee’s photograph that is stored in DHS databases through the  photograph screening tool. The employer is then supposed to match the  photograph shown on the computer screen with the photograph on the  original or photocopy of the employee’s lawful permanent resident card or  employment authorization document and make a determination as to  whether the photographs match. In completing the Form I-9, the  employer is required to review the documents presented by an employee  to prove identity and work eligibility and to certify that the documents  appear genuine and relate to the individual presenting them. According to  USCIS, for about 5 percent of employee queries that are run through E- Verify, employees present a green card or employment authorization  document as identification.
The use of the photograph screening tool is currently limited because  newly hired employees who are queried through the E-Verify system and  present documentation other than green cards or employment  authorization documents to verify work eligibility—about 95 percent of E- Verify queries—are not subject to the tool.  Expansion of the photograph  screening tool would require incorporating other forms of documentation  with related databases that store photographic information, such as  passports issued by the Department of State and driver’s licenses issued  by states.  Efforts to expand the tool have been initiated, but are still in the  early planning stages.  For example, according to USCIS officials, USCIS  and the Department of State have begun exploring ways to include visa  and U.S. passport documents in the tool, but these agencies have not yet  reached agreement regarding the use of these documents.  The  Department of State is working with DHS to determine the business  processes and system requirements of linking passport and visa databases  to E-Verify. Additionally, USCIS is negotiating with state motor vehicle  associations to incorporate driver’s license photographs into E-Verify, and  is seeking state motor vehicle agencies that are willing to participate in an  image-sharing pilot program. As of April 2008, no motor vehicle agencies  have yet officially agreed to participate in the pilot program.
As USCIS works to address fraud through data sharing with other  agencies, privacy issues—particularly in regards to sharing employee  information with employers—may be a challenge. In its 2007 evaluation of  E-Verify, Westat reported that some employers joining the Web Basic Pilot  were not appropriately handling their employees’ personal information.  For example, some employers did not privately inform employees that  queries of the employees’ information through E-Verify resulted in  tentative nonconfirmations. The report also pointed out that anyone  wanting access to the system could pose as an employer and obtain access  by signing a MOU with the E-Verify program.  USCIS officials told us that  taking actions to ensure that employers are legitimate when they register  for E-Verify is a long term goal for the program. However, according to  USCIS officials, implementing such controls to verify employer  authenticity may require access to information from other agencies, such  as Internal Revenue Service-issued employer identification numbers, to  which USCIS currently does not have access. Additionally, some states  and agencies have raised the issue of employee privacy. Representatives of  motor vehicle agencies have expressed concerns in regards to the  potential threats to customer privacy should their digital images be  accessible to employers. USCIS is working to address these privacy  concerns.  However, it remains to be seen whether USCIS will be able to  fully address all privacy concerns related to data and photograph sharing  and use among agencies and employers.
section_title: While USCIS Created a Monitoring and Compliance Branch, Work Remains to Staff the Branch, Develop Tools, and Finalize Enforcement Protocols
paragraphs: E-Verify is vulnerable to acts of employer fraud, such as when the  employer enters the same identity information to authorize multiple  workers. Moreover, although Westat has found that most participating  employers comply with E-Verify program procedures, some employers  have not complied or have misused the program, which may adversely  affect employees.  The findings from the Westat report showed that while  changes to the E-Verify program appear to have increased employer  compliance with program procedures compared to the previous version of  the program, employer noncompliance still occurred.  For example,  Westat reported that some employers used E-Verify to screen job  applicants before they were hired, an activity that is prohibited under E- Verify procedures.  Additionally, some employers took prohibited adverse  actions against employees—such as restricting work assignments,  reducing pay, or requiring employees to work longer hours or in poor  conditions—while they were contesting tentative nonconfirmations.   Finally, Westat found that some employers did not always promptly  terminate employees after receiving confirmation that the employees were  not authorized to work in the United States. USCIS reported that it is  working to address these issues by, for example, conducting education  and outreach activities about the E-Verify program.
In 2005, we reported that E-Verify provided a variety of reports that could  help USCIS determine whether employers followed program requirements  intended to safeguard employees—such as informing employees of  tentative nonconfirmation results and referring employees contesting  tentative nonconfirmations to SSA or DHS—but that USCIS lacked  sufficient staff to review employers’ use of the program.  Since then,  USCIS has added staff to its Verification Office, created a Monitoring and  Compliance branch to review employers’ use of the E-Verify system, and  identified planned activities for the branch.  As of April 2008, the  Monitoring and Compliance branch had 21 staff and planned to hire 32  additional staff in fiscal years 2008 and 2009.  Additionally, by January  2009, USCIS plans to establish a regional verification office with 135 staff  members to conduct status verification and monitoring and compliance  activities.
With regard to compliance and monitoring activities, USCIS has identified  53 employer and employee behaviors of noncompliance and monitors the  program for some of these behaviors. These behaviors include, among  others, the use of counterfeit documents or substituted identities; use of the E-Verify system that does not follow procedures  identified in the MOU between employers and DHS, such as  failures to complete training or perform verifications within  specific time frames; misuse of E-Verify to discriminate and/or adversely affect  employees such as verifying existing employees, prescreening,  firing employees who received tentative nonconfirmations, or not  firing unauthorized employees; and detecting instances where privacy information is compromised,  such as by sharing of passwords or nonemployer access of the  system.
Using some of these behaviors, among other things, to monitor employers’  use of E-Verify, USCIS plans to interact with employers who might not be  complying with program procedures in four main ways: (1) sending letters  or e-mails to advise employers of misuse of the system and to provide  appropriate remedies, (2) follow-up phone calls when employers fail to  respond to the initial letters or e-mails, (3) audits through which USCIS  requests documents and information be sent to the agency from  potentially noncompliant employers, and (4) site visits for in-person  interviews and document inspection when desk audits reveal cause for  further investigation. Under the current voluntary program, USCIS plans to  contact about 6 percent of participating employers regarding employer  noncompliance. USCIS estimates that under a mandatory E-Verify  program, the percentage of employers the agency would contact regarding  employer noncompliance would decrease to about 1 to 3 percent. If, as a  result of its monitoring activities, USCIS found that it needed to contact  more than 3 percent of employers, USCIS officials stated that the agency  plans to modify its approach for addressing employers’ noncompliance.   As of April 2008, USCIS plans to allocate its monitoring and compliance  efforts as follows: 45 percent of its activities would involve sending letters  and e-mails to employers; 45 percent would involve follow-up phone calls;  9 percent would involve desk audits; and 1 percent would involve site  visits. As part of a mandatory program, USCIS would modify this  distribution of monitoring activities by, for example, using letters, e-mails,  and phone calls for a larger percentage of interactions with employers.   However, USCIS is still in the early stages of implementing its monitoring  and compliance activities. Therefore, it is too early to tell whether these  activities will ensure that all employers fully follow program requirements  and properly use E-Verify under a mandatory program, especially since  such controls cannot be expected to provide absolute assurance.
The Monitoring and Compliance branch could help ICE better target its  worksite enforcement efforts by providing information that indicates cases  of employers’ egregious misuse of the system. Although ICE has no direct  role in monitoring employer use of E-Verify and does not have access to  program information that is maintained by USCIS unless it requests such  information from USCIS, ICE officials told us that program data could  indicate cases in which employers or employees may be fraudulently using  the system and therefore should help the agency better target its worksite  enforcement resources toward those employers. ICE officials noted that,  in a few cases, they have requested and received E-Verify data from USCIS  on specific employers who participate in the program and are under ICE  investigation. For example, USCIS told us that by monitoring use of the E- Verify program to date, staff were able to identify instances of fraudulent  use of social security numbers and referred such egregious examples of  fraud to ICE.  However, USCIS and ICE officials told us that case referrals  or requests for information between the two agencies have been  infrequent, and information on the resolution of these referrals is not  formally maintained by ICE. USCIS expects to complete and implement a  compliance tracking system to track referrals to and responses to requests  from ICE on compliance cases in fiscal year 2009.  USCIS and ICE are also  negotiating an MOU to define roles, responsibilities, and mechanisms for  sharing and using E-Verify information. Outstanding issues that need to be  resolved for the MOU include the type of information that USCIS will  provide to ICE through the referral process and the purposes for which  ICE will use this information.  While the MOU between USCIS and ICE is  incomplete, ICE officials anticipate that, if the E-Verify program is made  mandatory, they would receive an increased number of referrals for  investigation from USCIS.  Therefore, ICE officials told us that they plan to  require additional resources to follow-up on USCIS referrals. ICE also  hopes to be able to use elements of the E-Verify program to detect and  track large-scale instances of employer or employee fraud.
This concludes my prepared statement. I would be pleased to answer any  questions you and the Subcommittee Members may have.
section_title: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
paragraphs: For further information about this testimony, please contact Richard Stana  at 202-512-8777.
Other key contributors to this statement were Burns Chamberlain, Frances  Cook, Josh A. Diosomito, Rebecca Gambler, Danielle Pakdaman, Evi  Rezmovic, Julie E. Silvers, and Adam Vogt.
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the  United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further  permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or  other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to  reproduce this material separately.