Alternatives to Detention: Improved Data Collection and Analyses Needed to Better Assess Program Effectiveness
Released: 2014-11-13T00:00:00


Highlights: section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: Aliens awaiting removal proceedings or found to be removable from the United States are detained in ICE custody or released into the community under one or more options, such as release on bond and under supervision of the ATD program. Within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), ICE is responsible for overseeing aliens in detention and those released into the community. In 2004 ICE implemented the ATD program to be a cost-effective alternative to detaining aliens. ICE administers the program with contractor assistance using case management and electronic monitoring to ensure aliens comply with release conditions—including appearing at immigration court hearings and leaving the United States if they receive a final order of removal. The Joint Explanatory Statement to the 2014 Consolidated Appropriations Act mandated that GAO evaluate ICE's implementation of the ATD program.

This report addresses (1) trends in ATD program participation from fiscal years 2011 through 2013 and the extent to which ICE provides oversight to help ensure cost-effective program implementation, and (2) the extent that ICE measured the performance of the ATD program for fiscal years 2011 through 2013. GAO analyzed ICE and ATD program data, reviewed ICE documentation, and interviewed ICE and ATD contractor officials.

section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: From fiscal year 2011 through fiscal year 2013, the number of aliens who participated in the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) Alternatives to Detention (ATD) program increased from 32,065 to 40,864, in part because of increases in either enrollments or the average length of time aliens spent in one of the program's components. For example, during this time period, the number of aliens enrolled in the Full-service component, which is run by a contractor that maintains in-person contact with the alien and monitors the alien with either Global Positioning System (GPS) equipment or a telephonic reporting system, increased by 60 percent. In addition, the average length of time aliens spent in the Technology-only program component, which offers a lower level of supervision at a lower contract cost than the Full-service program component and involves ICE monitoring of aliens using either telephonic reporting or GPS equipment provided by a contractor, increased by 80 percent—from about 10 months to about 18 months. In 2011, ICE recommended practices in guidance to its Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) field offices to better ensure cost-effective implementation of the program. For example, ICE recommended that field officers move aliens who have demonstrated compliance under the Full-service component to the less costly Technology-only component. GAO's work showed differences in ERO field offices' implementation of the guidance. However, ICE headquarters officials said that because of limitations in how they collect and maintain program data, they do not know the extent to which field officers have consistently implemented this guidance. ICE plans to institute new data collection requirements to address these limitations and use these data for a variety of purposes; however, ICE has not considered how to analyze these data to monitor the extent to which ERO field offices are implementing the guidance. Analyzing these data, once collected, could help ICE better monitor the extent to which ERO field offices are implementing the practices in its guidance intended to ensure more cost-effective program operation.

ICE has established ATD program performance measures to, among other things, assess alien compliance with requirements to appear in court and leave the country after receiving a final order of removal, but it has not collected complete data for assessing progress against these measures. Specifically, ICE's ATD contractor collected data for the Full-service component, and from fiscal years 2011 through 2013, these data showed that over 99 percent of aliens with a scheduled court hearing appeared in court as required. However, ICE did not collect similar performance data to report results for aliens enrolled in the Technology-only component—which composed 39 percent of the overall ATD program participants in fiscal year 2013—because when the program was first created, ICE officials stated that they envisioned that most aliens would be in the Full-service component with data tracked by the contractor. ICE plans to expand the contractor's role in data collection but does not plan to require collection of performance data for aliens enrolled in the Technology-only component; rather ICE plans to leave it to the discretion of field officials as to whether to require the contractor to collect these data. Without requirements to collect these data, ICE may not have complete information to fully assess program performance.

section_title: What GAO Recommends
paragraphs: GAO recommends that ICE analyze data to monitor ERO field offices' implementation of guidance and require the collection of data on the Technology-only component. DHS concurred with the recommendations.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: For more than a decade, the federal government has been exploring cost- effective alternatives to immigration detention that would provide  appropriate federal oversight for some of the over 1.5 million aliens in  fiscal year 2013 who, if not detained in a detention facility, were released  into the community. The Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) U.S.  Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is responsible for such  oversight and implemented the Alternatives to Detention (ATD) program  in 2004 to be a cost-effective alternative to detention that uses case  management and electronic monitoring to ensure adult aliens released  into the community comply with their release conditions—including  requirements to appear at immigration court hearings—and comply with  final orders of removal from the United States. Congress has increased  funding for operation of the ATD program from $3 million in fiscal year  2003 to $91.4 million in fiscal year 2014.

ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) enforces the nation’s  immigration laws by identifying and apprehending aliens, detaining these  individuals when legally required or otherwise appropriate during the  course of their immigration proceedings, and upon completion of those  proceedings, ensuring that aliens who receive a final order of removal  leave the United States. ERO prioritizes the apprehension, arrest, and  removal of aliens from the United States who are convicted criminals,  pose a threat to national security, are fugitives or obstruct immigration  controls, or are recent border entrants. Based out of 24 field offices and  186 suboffices located throughout the country, ERO is also responsible  for supervising aliens who are not held in detention facilities, but instead  are released to the community under ATD or other release conditions,  such as being released on bond. ERO’s ATD Unit provides guidance and  coordinates program implementation across participating ICE ERO field  offices that administer the program, with the assistance of a contractor  that provides technological and case management services. ERO field  officials’ responsibilities include ensuring that detained and nondetained  aliens comply with requirements to appear in court for their immigration  hearings, which are administered by the Department of Justice’s  Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR). At 59 EOIR immigration courts across the country, immigration judges conduct court hearings to  determine whether aliens should be removed from the country under an  order of removal, granted voluntary departure, or allowed to remain in the  United States under a form of relief, such as asylum.

Since the ATD program was first implemented, ICE has made changes to  align the program with agency priorities and program goals—with some  key program changes occurring around 2011. The Joint Explanatory  Statement to the 2014 Consolidated Appropriations Act (Pub. L. No. 113- 76) mandated that GAO provide a report evaluating ICE’s implementation  of the ATD program, including any recommendations for how the program  could be improved. What were the trends in ATD program participation from fiscal years 2011  through 2013, and to what extent does ICE provide oversight to help  ensure cost-effective program implementation? (2) To what extent has  ICE measured the performance of the ATD program for fiscal years 2011  through 2013?

This report addresses the following questions: (1)

160 Cong. Rec. H475, H930. data, we also calculated the average ATD program cost per day per alien.  We could not compare this cost per day for aliens who are released under  other conditions, such as being released on bond, because ICE does not  capture cost data associated with these release options. We also  reviewed the Department of Justice’s EOIR data on the length of time  aliens spend in immigration proceedings before receiving their final  disposition. We assessed the reliability of these data by interviewing or  soliciting written responses from ICE and EOIR officials regarding their  oversight of their respective databases, as well as the ATD database  maintained by ICE’s contractor, and reviewed the data for any missing  data fields, entries with values beyond expected ranges, or other entries  that appeared to be unusual. We determined that the data were  sufficiently reliable for the purposes of this report. We also interviewed  ICE and contractor headquarters officials regarding (1) how ICE has  structured the ATD program and how ICE officials decide which aliens to  place in the ATD program and at what supervision level; (2) how ICE  officials determine when to terminate an alien from the ATD program or  one of the program’s components; (3) changes to program  implementation over time, including future plans; and (4) benefits and  challenges of the program. In addition, we interviewed ICE ERO field  office officials and contractor officials in four locations—Dallas, Texas;  Los Angeles, California; Las Vegas, Nevada; and St. Paul, Minnesota— regarding their implementation of the program. We selected these offices  on the basis of various factors, including the (1) size of the program at  each office, (2) geographic location, (3) program components offered, and  (4) recommendations from cognizant DHS officials. While we cannot  generalize the results of our interviews to all ICE ERO field office  locations, officials we interviewed provided us with a general overview  and perspective on how ICE implements the ATD program at the selected  locations. In addition, we compared ICE’s management of the ATD  program against standards in Standards for Internal Control in the  Federal Government.

To determine how ICE measured the performance of the ATD program  for fiscal years 2011 through 2013, we analyzed DHS documents,  congressional budget justifications, and ICE’s teleconference meeting  notes regarding the ATD program. We also analyzed ICE and ICE  contractor data from fiscal years 2011 through 2013 related to ATD  program performance, including data on court appearances, removals  from the United States, and other performance metrics. To assess the  reliability of these data, we interviewed ICE and ATD contractor  headquarters officials regarding database oversight and reviewed the  data for any missing data fields, entries with values beyond expected  ranges, or other entries that appeared to be unusual. We determined that  the data were sufficiently reliable for the purposes of this report, except  for certain limitations as noted later in our report. For example, because  of limitations in some of the performance data, we were not able to  assess some aspects of performance results for one component of the  ATD program or compare performance data of aliens in the ATD program  with performance data for the rest of the nondetained population. We also  interviewed ICE and contractor officials in headquarters and the 4 ICE  ERO field office locations to obtain their perspectives on performance  metrics and future plans for data collection. Additionally, we compared  ICE’s management of the ATD program against standards in Standards  for Internal Control in the Federal Government.

We conducted this performance audit from March 2014 to November  2014, 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
subsections: section_title: EOIR and ICE Roles in Managing Aliens
paragraphs: Within the Department of Justice, EOIR immigration judges conduct  hearings to determine whether an alien is removable from the United  States and whether he or she is eligible for a form of relief or protection  from removal. If an immigration judge determines that an alien is  removable from the United States and not eligible for relief or protection  from removal, including voluntary departure, the immigration judge can  issue an order of removal. The removal order becomes administratively  final when all avenues for appeal with EOIR to remain in the United  States have been exhausted or waived by the alien, and the alien is to be  removed from the United States. Once an order of removal is final, ICE  is responsible for carrying out the removal. In fiscal year 2013, ICE  reported removing 368,644 aliens from the United States.

While immigration judges have the authority to make custody  determinations, ICE also makes the initial decision as to whether to detain  aliens in ICE custody or release them to the community pending removal  proceedings, subject to certain laws. The Immigration and Nationality  Act, as well as other legislation, requires that under specified  circumstances ICE detain certain aliens, including those arriving without  documentation or with fraudulent documentation, those who are  inadmissible or removable on criminal or national security grounds, and   Even if not required to  those aliens subject to a final order of removal.do so, ICE may detain aliens who it believes pose a threat to public safety  or are flight risks, with the option for some aliens to be subsequently  released. In fiscal year 2013, ICE booked 440,557 aliens into detention  facilities.

ICE uses one or more release options when it determines that an alien is  not to be detained in ICE’s custody—including bond, order of  recognizance, order of supervision, parole, and on condition of  participation in the ATD program.

If an alien is not a threat to public safety, presents a low risk of flight,  and is not required to be detained, ICE may release him or her on (1)  a bond of at least $1,500 or (2) an order of recognizance that requires  the alien to abide by specified release conditions but does not require  the alien to post a bond.

DHS may release an alien on an order of supervision, despite such  alien being subject to a final order of removal, where there is no  significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future,  because, for example, travel documents are not forthcoming. An  alien subject to a final order of deportation or removal may also  request a stay of deportation or removal.  ICE may release certain aliens on parole for urgent humanitarian  reasons or significant public benefit, or for a medical emergency or  legitimate law enforcement objective, on a case-by-case basis.

Finally, an alien can also be placed in the ATD program, which  requires that, among other things, aliens released into the community  agree to appear at all hearings and report to ICE periodically.

In fiscal year 2013, ICE released aliens under these various options  113,690 times, as shown in table 1.

To assist ICE officers in their decisions whether to detain aliens in ICE  custody or release them, ICE developed an analytical tool known as the  Risk Classification Assessment (RCA). The RCA, which ICE fully  deployed in February 2013, considers several factors related to an alien’s  public safety and flight risks—such as criminal history, prior removal data,  ties to the local community, and gang affiliation—and recommends each  alien for detention or release. An ICE officer reviews the RCA results  along with other factors, such as an alien’s final order status, and, after  obtaining supervisory approval, makes a custody determination. ICE  officials stated that they generally do not use the RCA for aliens that ICE  must detain by law or that are likely to be removed from the United States  within 5 days.

section_title: Overview of the ATD Program
paragraphs: ICE created the ATD program in 2004 as another condition of release to  help ensure that aliens released into the community appear at their  immigration proceedings. The ATD program seeks to provide an  enhanced monitoring option for those aliens for whom ICE, or an  immigration judge, has determined that detention is neither mandated nor  appropriate, yet may need a higher level of supervision than that provided  by the less restrictive release conditions.case for possible placement in ATD, officers are to consider the alien’s  criminal history, compliance history, community and family ties, and  humanitarian concerns. ICE may require participation in the ATD program  as a condition of the alien’s release during immigration proceedings, or  upon receipt of the alien’s final order of removal or grant of voluntary  departure.

When reviewing an alien’s  For fiscal year 2003, ICE was allocated $3 million for alternatives to  detention to promote community-based programs for supervised release  from detention.  Subsequently, ICE created the first iteration of the ATD  program in 2004 across eight cities; this iteration ran until 2009 and  consisted of three separate programs operated by ICE and two  companies under separate contracts.varying levels of alien supervision intended to help improve alien  attendance rates at scheduled immigration court proceedings. By the end  of 2009, the ATD program expanded to all of the 24 ICE ERO field offices  and 5 of 186 suboffices.

ICE initiated the second phase of the ATD program in 2009 with a 5-year  contract with a private contractor and consolidated the program into a  single contract with two components—Full-service and Technology- only.  Behavioral Interventions, Inc. (BI), the contractor, operates the  Full-service component out of stand-alone sites or out of ICE offices— currently in 45 cities. To be eligible for the Full-service component,  aliens must be at least 18 years old and generally must reside within  about 75 miles of the contractor’s office, depending on the field office.  The contractor maintains in-person contact with the alien, which includes  requiring periodic office visits and conducting unscheduled home visits,  and monitoring the alien with either Global Positioning System (GPS)  equipment or a telephonic reporting system. The contractor also  provides case management services, which may include helping aliens  understand the legal process, acquiring travel documents, and developing  travel plans; reminds aliens to attend immigration proceedings; and  handles initial alerts and violations for aliens. Last, the contractor  documents aliens’ attendance at court hearings and compliance with  electronic monitoring and in-person supervision requirements. ICE  officers are ultimately responsible for removing aliens from the United  States and responding to program violations.

ICE officers can change the level of supervision regardless of where an alien is in his or  her immigration proceedings, per a contract modification. According to contractor officials,  this is typically done in special circumstances. released into the community after a post-order custody review; the level  of supervision determined for these aliens depends on whether their  removal from the United States is significantly likely in the reasonably  foreseeable future.

ICE ERO field office officials manage the Technology-only component of  the ATD program, which is available in 96 locations, utilizing the  contractor’s systems and equipment. The Technology-only component  offers a lower level of supervision at a lower contract cost than the Full- service component and allows ICE to monitor aliens’ compliance with the  terms of their release using either telephonic reporting or GPS equipment   ICE officers are responsible for providing  provided by the contractor.case management, in addition to removing aliens from the country and  responding to violations. In locations where Full-service and Technology- only are available, ICE officers can de-escalate aliens from the Full- service component to the Technology-only component (or vice versa) at  their discretion. For both components, ICE officers determine when an  alien’s participation in the program should be terminated. ICE terminates  aliens from the ATD program who are removed from the United States,  depart voluntarily, are arrested by ICE for removal, or receive a benefit or  relief from removal. ICE may also terminate an alien from the program  when aliens are arrested by another law enforcement entity, abscond, or  otherwise violate the conditions of the ATD program. Further, ICE may  terminate an alien from the program if ICE officers determine the alien is  no longer required to participate. The program requirements for the  various levels of supervision for aliens in the Full-service and Technology- only components are shown in figure 1.

section_title: ICE Expanded the ATD Program and Changed Program Use, but Has Not Monitored Implementation of Guidance Intended to Help Ensure Program Cost-Effectiveness
paragraphs: The number of aliens participating in the ATD program increased from  fiscal year 2011 to fiscal year 2013, in part because of increases in either  enrollments or the average length of time aliens spent in one of the  program’s components; and ICE changed the focus of the program to  align with changes in agency priorities. Pursuant to ICE guidance in 2011,  ICE also recommended that ERO field offices transition aliens among the  two ATD program components—or levels of supervision—to help facilitate  cost-effective use of the ATD program; however, ICE has not monitored  the extent to which ERO field offices have consistently implemented the  guidance. ICE plans to increase the average daily participation level of  both ATD program components with increased funding, but ATD program  officials stated that several factors affect their ability to identify future  capacity and expand the program.
subsections: section_title: The Number of Aliens Participating in the ATD Program Increased, in Part, because of Increased Enrollments and Longer Times That Some Aliens Spent in the Program
paragraphs: ICE increased the number of aliens participating in the ATD program over  the last 3 fiscal years with some differences between the Full-service and  Technology-only components, and this increase, in part, can be attributed  to increased enrollments and the increased average length of time aliens  spent in the Technology-only component of the program. Specifically, the  total number of unique aliens who participated in the program increased  from 32,065 in fiscal year 2011 to 40,864 in fiscal year 2013, with most  aliens participating in the Full-service component, as shown in figure 2.  These numbers include all aliens in the ATD program for each of these  years—regardless of the year in which they were initially enrolled. The  increase in the number of aliens in the program over this time occurred  primarily in the Technology-only component. Specifically, the overall  number of aliens participating in the ATD program grew by 27 percent;  the number of aliens in the Technology-only component increased by 84  percent; and the number of aliens in the Full-service component  increased by 23 percent.

During this time, the composition of aliens in the ATD program also  changed to align with agency priorities. Specifically, ICE shifted its overall  enforcement priorities with a June 2010 policy memorandum that detailed  the priorities for alien apprehension, detention, and removal as follows:  (1) aliens who pose a danger to national security or a risk to public  safety—including aliens convicted of crimes—and (2) recent illegal  entrants and aliens who are fugitives or otherwise obstruct immigration  controls.memo, ICE has resources to remove only approximately 400,000 aliens  per year from the country, less than 4 percent of the estimated illegal  alien population in the United States. According to ICE data, about 50  percent of aliens in the ATD program met an ICE enforcement priority in   ICE established such priorities because, as stated in the  fiscal year 2012, such as aliens convicted of crimes. As of April 2014, ICE  reported that about 90 percent of aliens in the ATD program met ICE  enforcement priorities and 51 percent were criminal aliens.

One factor contributing to the increase in ATD program participation was  that ICE generally increased the number of aliens it enrolled in the  program each year. Specifically, the total number of unique enrollments in  the ATD program increased by 26 percent—from 16,252 in fiscal year  2011 to 20,441 in fiscal year 2013—although there was a slight decline in  fiscal year 2012 before increasing in fiscal year 2013. As shown in  figure 3, the increase from fiscal years 2011 to 2013 was due to  enrollments in the Full-service component—which increased by 60  percent during this time.

Information on alien enrollments showed that the extent to which ICE  booked aliens into detention facilities or released them into the  community varied across fiscal years 2011 through fiscal year 2013, as  shown in table 2, although these enrollments were not unique. For  example, these enrollments include aliens who may have been enrolled in  both detention and one or more release options in the same fiscal year  and aliens who may have been booked multiple times into detention  facilities or released multiple times under the same option in the same  fiscal year.

During this time, ICE also expanded use of the ATD program across ERO  field office and suboffice locations. Specifically, ICE expanded use of the  Full-service component from 38 ERO field offices and suboffices in fiscal  year 2011 to 44 field offices in fiscal year 2013. During this time, ICE  expanded the use of the Technology-only component from 70 to 76 ERO  field office and suboffice locations that were actively using the  component.

Another factor contributing to the increase in the number of aliens in the  Technology-only component of the ATD program was an increase in the  length of time these aliens were in the program. While the average length  of time aliens spent in the ATD program has remained fairly constant,  differences existed across the program’s components. The average  length of time that aliens spent in the Full-service component decreased  by about 20 percent from fiscal year 2011 to fiscal year 2013, while the  average length of time increased nearly 80 percent for aliens in the  Technology-only component during this same time, as shown in table 3.  Specifically, aliens enrolled in the Full-service component in fiscal year  2013 spent about 10 months in the component, and those enrolled in  Technology-only in fiscal year 2013 spent about 18 months in this  component. of guidance that directs field office officials to move compliant aliens from  the more expensive Full-service component to the Technology-only  component after 90 days, which is discussed later in this report.

section_title: ICE Increased the Number of Aliens Terminated from the ATD Program, but Has Not Monitored Implementation of Guidance to Help Ensure Cost-Effective Program Implementation
paragraphs: ICE increased the number of aliens terminated from the ATD program  since 2011 after guidance directed ERO field offices to more cost- effectively use the ATD program; however, ICE has not monitored the  extent to which field offices have implemented the guidance. Under the  original ATD contract, ICE officials stated that aliens enrolled in the ATD  program generally stayed in the program from the time of enrollment  through completion of the immigration process (i.e., completion of a final  court hearing or, if ordered removed at the final hearing, removal from the  United States). However, concerned about the time it has taken for aliens  to complete immigration proceedings and the subsequent impact on ATD  program costs, ICE recommended in 2011 that ERO field offices help  facilitate cost-effective use of the ATD program. Pursuant to this  guidance, ICE officials recommended that field officials reserve more  intense and costly supervision options under the Full-service component  for (1) aliens who are newly enrolled in ATD who do not have an order of  removal or an immediate immigration court date and (2) aliens who have  already received a final order of removal from the country—the latter of  which is seen as a best practice, according to ICE. Specifically, pursuant  to ICE’s guidance, ICE recommended that ICE ERO field office officials  assess whether aliens in the Full-service component demonstrated  compliance with the conditions of their release, at least every 90 days,  and if so, terminate them from the Full-service component after 90 days  and de-escalate them to lower levels of supervision at a lower cost by  moving them to the Technology-only component of the ATD program.  Conversely, ICE recommended that ERO field office officials terminate  aliens from the Technology-only component who received their final order  of removal or grant of voluntary departure and escalate them to the Full- service component so that ICE, along with the contractor, could more  easily monitor and ensure their departure. Subsequently, ICE increased  the number of terminations from the two components of the ATD  program. Specifically, as shown in figure 4, ICE increased the number of  terminations from the Full-service component by 82 percent and the  number of terminations from the Technology-only component by 299  percent from fiscal year 2011 to fiscal year 2013.

ICE does not have complete data to identify the specific reasons field  officials decided to terminate aliens from the program and therefore  cannot determine whether ERO field offices are implementing the  guidance for changing an alien’s level of supervision between the ATD  program components with the goal of cost-effectively implementing the  ATD program. According to ICE officials, because the individual  circumstances for each alien’s case can vary, the decision to terminate or  change an alien’s level of supervision is made by the field officer, who  decides whether to keep aliens in the Full-service component, de- escalate aliens from the Full-service component to the Technology-only  component, or terminate aliens from the ATD program entirely by placing  them in detention or releasing them under their own recognizance or  another release option. While ICE collects some data on the reasons for  termination decisions made by field officials, ICE does not collect data on  the specific reason why field officials would determine an alien is no  longer required to participate in the program. For example, our analysis of  termination data for the Full-service component showed that 13 percent of  terminations from the Full-service component were made after  confirmation of an alien’s removal and departure from the United States  or after the alien had been granted relief and benefits to remain in the  country, and another 15 percent of terminations were made for reasons  including that aliens had violated the terms of the ATD program, had  absconded, had been arrested, were pending departure, or other  reasons. However, it was unclear why ERO field office officials made  most terminations—71 percent—before the completion of the aliens’  immigration proceedings or removal from the United States, because the  reason provided was that a field official determined that an alien was no  longer required to participate in the program. As a result, ICE officials  stated that they did not know if field office officials made the majority of  these terminations in response to its guidance recommending changing  the levels of supervision that could result in more cost-effective operation  of the program, or for other reasons.Full-service terminations in fiscal years 2011 through 2013.

section_title: ICE Officials Cited Factors That Affect Future Capacity and Expansion of the ATD Program
paragraphs: ICE intends to increase the average daily participation level of both ATD  program components with increased funding, according to ICE’s fiscal  year 2015 budget justification; however, ATD program officials stated that  several factors affect their ability to identify future capacity and expand  the program. These officials said that one of these factors was limited  information for determining how many aliens who were detained or  otherwise released could have been considered suitable for the ATD  program. For example, ATD program officials said that ERO field office  officials who manage the ATD program have the ability to see the cases  that are referred to the ATD program, but not the cases that resulted in  the alien being detained in ICE custody or released under other options  after the RCA process is completed. Nationwide, the RCA tool  recommended that 91 percent of the 168,087 aliens processed by the  RCA in fiscal year 2013 be detained in ICE custody—some of whom were  subsequently eligible for bond—and that the remaining 9 percent (15,162  aliens) be released under ATD or other release options. However, ICE  field officials managing the ATD program may not have seen the cases  that resulted in detention or release and accordingly, are limited in their  ability to estimate to what extent ATD program capacity could be  expanded or changed in their location. To help increase the number of  cases referred for ATD program consideration, ICE has issued guidance  to its ERO field offices emphasizing that all nondetained criminal aliens  should be given priority consideration for ATD program enrollment.  Accordingly, this guidance directs the Criminal Alien Program and  Fugitive Operations teams that generate case referrals in the field to  coordinate with their local ATD component for enrollment consideration,  including aliens released on a bond. ICE reported that field offices  coupling a bond with ATD as a condition of release have shown an  increased rate of success in alien removals from the United States.

Other factors that ICE officials identified as affecting their ability to identify  capacity and expand the ATD program are federal and state statutes and  agency guidance. For example, ICE reported that from fiscal year 2011 to  fiscal year 2013, 77 percent to 80 percent of aliens in detention facilities  were required to be detained under federal law, and were not eligible for   In addition, federal law requires that  consideration in the ATD program. ICE maintain a minimum of 34,000 detention beds each day,part of its fiscal year 2015 budget justification, ICE reported that a  decrease in the number of detention beds required to be maintained  would result in an increase in the number of aliens who could be enrolled  in the ATD program. In regard to state statute, one state, for example,  passed a law whereby law enforcement officials have the discretion to   and as  cooperate with federal immigration officials by detaining an individual on  the basis of an immigration hold after that individual becomes eligible for  release from custody, only where certain criteria are met. In regard to  agency guidance, ICE has instructed ERO field offices generally not to  enroll aliens who are not likely removable, as well as aliens who were  brought to the United States as children and may be eligible for the  Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.

ICE officials stated that they did not plan to expand use of the ATD  program to additional ERO field office locations until after the new  contract was in place; however, officials reported that several factors  could affect whether a field office could be or is willing to implement the  program. For example, ICE reported in May 2014 that five field offices  had requested to implement the Full-service component in their office but  ICE did not approve the requests because the field offices did not have  the necessary resources to implement the program. Such resources  include officers’ time to respond to instances of alien noncompliance with  the terms of the program and review ATD cases and make supervision  and termination decisions.

section_title: ICE Has Established Program Performance Measures for the ATD Program, but Has Not Collected Complete Data for Assessing Progress against All of These Measures
paragraphs: ICE established two program performance measures to assess the ATD  program’s effectiveness in (1) ensuring alien compliance with court  appearance requirements and (2) ensuring removals from the United  States, as well as performance rates to evaluate the program’s  performance, but limitations in data collection hinder ICE’s ability to  assess overall program performance.

Compliance with court appearances. ICE established a program  performance measure in 2004 to monitor alien compliance with  requirements to appear at their immigration hearings. Data collected by  ICE’s ATD contractor for the Full-service component of the ATD program  from fiscal years 2011 through 2013 showed that over 99 percent of  aliens with a scheduled court hearing appeared at their scheduled court  hearings while participating in this component of the ATD program, with  the appearance rate dropping slightly to over 95 percent of aliens with a  scheduled final hearing appearing at their final removal hearing, as shown  in figure 6.

However, ICE does not collect similar performance data or report results  on the court appearance rate for aliens enrolled in the Technology-only  component of the ATD program—which constituted 39 percent of the  overall ATD program in fiscal year 2013. According to ICE officials, the  agency did not require the contractor to capture similar data for the  Technology-only component because when the ATD program was  created, it was envisioned that most aliens would be in the Full-service  component for the duration of the immigration process, and data for  aliens in the Full-service component are collected by the contractor.officials stated that they did not have sufficient resources to collect such  data for the Technology-only component, given other priorities.

ICE has taken steps to address the lack of data collection for the  Technology-only component. Specifically, during the course of our review,  ICE initiated a pilot program with its contractor in May 2014 to establish  improved data collection efforts, as well as expanded supervision options.  The pilot, which is being tested in eight cities, increases the role the ATD  contractor has in collecting and tracking data on aliens in the Technology- only component. Specifically, the contractor tracks compliance with  release requirements, including court appearance requirements, for aliens  enrolled in the Technology-only component, as it already does for aliens  enrolled in the Full-service component. Under the new contract, ICE plans  to implement key aspects of the pilot across all program locations,  including giving ICE officers the ability to require the contractor to track  data on aliens in the Technology-only component—including data on  court appearances—to the contractor, according to the request for  proposal for the new ATD program contract. However, ICE officials will  not be required to have the contractor collect these data under the  contract. While ICE’s plan to expand data collection for the Technology- only component under the new contract is a positive step that will help  provide more information for assessing the performance of that program  component, ICE may not have complete data for assessing program  performance without requirements that ICE or contractor field staff collect  these data. Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government  states that agencies should employ control activities to monitor their   More specifically, agencies should develop mechanisms  performance.to reliably collect data that can be used to compare and assess program  outcomes related to entire program populations. Requiring ERO field  offices to collect, or have the contractor collect, court appearance data on  the Technology-only component of the ATD program would help ensure  that ICE has complete data for assessing the performance of that  program component as well as the overall ATD program, particularly in  light of ICE’s guidance issued in fiscal year 2011 directing field offices to  transition more aliens to the Technology-only component.

Removals from the United States. ICE established a new program  performance measure in fiscal year 2011 to assess the number of aliens  removed from the country who had participated in the ATD program.  ICE officials said the decision to replace the court appearance goal with  the removal goal was based on the fact that the court appearance rate  had consistently surpassed 99 percent and the program needed to  establish another goal to demonstrate improvement over time. For this  program performance measure, a removal attributed to the ATD program  counts if the alien (1) was enrolled in ATD for at least 1 day, and (2) was  removed or had departed voluntarily from the United States in the same  fiscal year, regardless of whether the alien was enrolled in ATD at the  time the alien left the country. As shown in table 5, ATD met its goal for  removals in fiscal years 2012 and 2013. In fiscal year 2012, their goal  was to have a 3 percent increase from their fiscal year 2011 total, and in  fiscal year 2013, a 3 percent increase from their 2012 removal goal.

Performance rates. ICE also uses four performance rates to evaluate  how well the ATD program is operating while aliens are participating in  the program. These four performance rates (success rate, failure rate,  absconder rate, and removal rate)—though not measures of how well  aliens in the ATD program comply with court appearances or removal  orders—assess the status of an alien’s case at the time the alien is  terminated from the ATD program. These performance rates are based  on outcomes defined as favorable, neutral, and unfavorable.

Favorable outcomes reflect cases where the final outcome of an  alien’s immigration proceeding resulted in either a verified departure  from the United States or a grant of relief and benefits to remain in the  country while the alien was an active participant in the ATD program.

Neutral outcomes do not reflect final outcomes of immigration  proceedings, but rather include aliens who are terminated from the  ATD program while awaiting departure, after being arrested, or  because ICE determined the alien no longer needed to participate in  the program—which could be because the case was administratively  closed, the alien moved to a jurisdiction that did not have the ATD  program, or ICE determined to lower or raise the alien’s level of  supervision by moving him or her to a detention facility or another  release option.

Unfavorable outcomes include aliens who were terminated from the  ATD program after absconding or violating program requirements.

Specifically, the success rate reflects the percentage of aliens whose  cases resulted in either favorable outcomes or neutral outcomes. This  rate essentially measures the ATD program’s effectiveness in being able  to track and monitor an alien while in the program, according to ICE  officials. The failure rate is the converse of the success rate, measuring  the percentage of unfavorable outcomes, including noncompliance with  program terms or absconding from the program. The absconder rate  measures the percentage of aliens whom ICE terminated from the  program as a result of aliens absconding from the program. The removal  rate approximates the percentage of aliens in ATD who will be removed  or depart after the completion of their immigration proceedings. ICE  calculates these rates for both its Full-service and Technology-only  components.

Using these performance rates, ICE reported that for the Full-service  component over the last 3 years, ICE, along with its contractor, was able  to track and monitor 90 percent or more of aliens until they were  terminated from the Full-service component of the ATD program, with  variance in the rate of aliens who had absconded from the program or  who were projected to be removed from the country. During that same  time, ICE reported improved ability to track and monitor aliens in the  Technology-only component from nearly 80 percent in fiscal year 2011 to  nearly 90 percent in fiscal year 2013. See table 6 for Full-service and  Technology-only performance rates over these last 3 years.

However, ATD program performance measures and rates provide limited  information about the aliens who are terminated from the ATD program  prior to receiving the final disposition of their immigration proceedings or  were removed or voluntarily departed from the country. Specifically, with  respect to program performance measures, ICE counts an alien who was  terminated from the program and was subsequently removed from the  United States toward his or her removal performance measure as long as  the alien was in the program during the same fiscal year he or she was  removed from the country. However, aliens who were terminated from  the program do not count toward court appearance rates if they  subsequently do not appear for court. Further, performance rates, for  example, did not reflect whether the 87 percent of the aliens whom ICE  terminated from the ATD program in fiscal year 2013 were removed,  voluntarily departed from the United States, or were granted relief. ICE  officials reported that it would be challenging to determine an alien’s  compliance with the terms of his or her release after termination from the  ATD program given insufficient resources and the size of the nondetained  alien population. In accordance with ICE guidance, staff resources are  instead directed toward apprehending and removing aliens from the  United States who are considered enforcement and removal priorities.

section_title: Conclusions
paragraphs: The ATD program is intended to help ICE cost-effectively manage the  aliens for whom ICE, or an immigration judge, has determined that  detention is neither mandated nor appropriate, yet may need a higher  level of supervision when released into the community until they are  removed from the United States or receive approval to remain in the  country. ICE has altered its implementation of the ATD program to  address the cost associated with keeping aliens in the program in light of  lengthy immigration proceedings. However, by analyzing data that ICE  plans to collect on supervision levels and specific reasons aliens are  terminated from the program, ICE could be better positioned to monitor  ERO field offices’ implementation of guidance intended to ensure cost- effective management of the ATD program. Further, collecting reliable  data on both components of the program would help ensure that ICE has  more complete data for assessing the relative performance of these  program components as well as the overall ATD program.

section_title: Recommendations for Executive Action
paragraphs: To strengthen ICE’s management of the ATD program and ensure that it  has complete and reliable data to assess and make necessary resource  and management decisions, we recommend that the Secretary of  Homeland Security direct the Deputy Assistant Secretary of ICE to take  the following two actions: analyze data on changes in supervision levels and program  terminations to monitor ERO field offices’ implementation of ICE  guidance intended to ensure cost-effective management of the  program, and  require that field offices ensure that ICE or contractor staff collect and  report data on alien compliance with court appearance requirements  for all participants in the Technology-only component of the ATD  program.

section_title: Agency Comments and Our Evaluation
paragraphs: We provided a draft of this report to the Departments of Homeland  Security and Justice for their review and comment—both provided  technical comments, which we incorporated as appropriate. We provided  selected excerpts of this draft report to the ATD contractor to obtain its  views and verify the accuracy of the information it provided, and the  contractor had no technical comments. DHS also provided written  comments, which are summarized below and reproduced in full in  appendix I. DHS concurred with the two recommendations in the report  and described actions under way or planned to address them.

With regard to the first recommendation, that ICE analyze data on  changes in supervision levels and program terminations to monitor field  offices’ implementation of guidance intended to ensure cost-effective  management of the program, DHS concurred. DHS stated that ICE  recognized that, because of contractual limitations, information on  termination codes was not amenable to detailed reporting and analysis,  which limited the program’s ability to adapt and improve. To address this,  ICE established a requirement under its new ATD contract that  information on termination codes must be collected and reported and that  this would allow for more in-depth analyses that may yield avenues for  further program refinements. DHS provided an estimated completion date  of December 31, 2014. These planned actions, if fully implemented to  include monitoring of field offices’ cost-effective management of the  program, should address the intent of the recommendation.

With regard to the second recommendation, to require that field offices  ensure that ICE or contractor staff collect and report data on alien  compliance with court appearance requirements for all participants in the  Technology-only component of the ATD program, DHS concurred. DHS  stated that ICE was aware that this recommended enhancement would  greatly improve the program and that ICE began working in early fiscal  year 2014 to implement the enhancement while developing the  requirements for the new ATD contract. Under the new contract, ICE will  have the opportunity to select a variety of case management services,  including EOIR case tracking for any participant in the ATD program.

DHS provided an estimated completion date of December 31, 2014.  These planned actions, if fully implemented to include oversight on the  extent that field offices are ensuring that ICE or contractor staff collect  and report data on alien compliance with court appearance rates, should  address the intent of the recommendation.

We are sending copies to the Secretary of Homeland Security, the  Attorney General of the United States, appropriate congressional  committees, and other interested parties. In addition, the report is  available at no charge on the GAO website at http://www.gao.gov.

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact  me at (202) 512-8777 or gamblerr@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 II.

section_title: Appendix I: Comments from the Department of Homeland Security

section_title: Appendix II: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
subsections: section_title: GAO Contact

section_title: Staff Acknowledgments
paragraphs: In addition to the contact named above, Lacinda Ayers (Assistant  Director), Tracey Cross, Landis Lindsey, David Alexander, Pedro  Almoguera, Frances Cook, Jon Najmi, Jessica Orr, and Eric Warren  made significant contributions to the work.


Question-summary annotations: questions: question: How has the number of aliens in ICE's ATD program changed since 2011?
answer: From fiscal year 2011 through fiscal year 2013, the number of aliens who participated in the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) Alternatives to Detention (ATD) program increased from 32,065 to 40,864, in part because of increases in either enrollments or the average length of time aliens spent in one of the program's components.
child_questions: question: What data supports this claim?
answer: For example, during this time period, the number of aliens enrolled in the Full-service component, which is run by a contractor that maintains in-person contact with the alien and monitors the alien with either Global Positioning System (GPS) equipment or a telephonic reporting system, increased by 60 percent.

question: How did the average length of time aliens spent in the Technology-only program component change?
answer: In addition, the average length of time aliens spent in the Technology-only program component, which offers a lower level of supervision at a lower contract cost than the Full-service program component and involves ICE monitoring of aliens using either telephonic reporting or GPS equipment provided by a contractor, increased by 80 percent—from about 10 months to about 18 months.

question: What did ICE recommend in 2011 to ensure cost-effective implementation of the ATD program?
answer: In 2011, ICE recommended practices in guidance to its Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) field offices to better ensure cost-effective implementation of the program. For example, ICE recommended that field officers move aliens who have demonstrated compliance under the Full-service component to the less costly Technology-only component.
child_questions: question: How well have field officers followed these recommendations?
answer: GAO's work showed differences in ERO field offices' implementation of the guidance. However, ICE headquarters officials said that because of limitations in how they collect and maintain program data, they do not know the extent to which field officers have consistently implemented this guidance.

question: How does ICE plan to improve the quality of its data?
answer: ICE plans to institute new data collection requirements to address these limitations and use these data for a variety of purposes; however, ICE has not considered how to analyze these data to monitor the extent to which ERO field offices are implementing the guidance.

question: How would an analysis of better-quality data benefit ICE?
answer: Analyzing these data, once collected, could help ICE better monitor the extent to which ERO field offices are implementing the practices in its guidance intended to ensure more cost-effective program operation.

questions: question: What has ICE established ATD program performance measures to accomplish?
answer: ICE has established ATD program performance measures to, among other things, assess alien compliance with requirements to appear in court and leave the country after receiving a final order of removal, but it has not collected complete data for assessing progress against these measures. Specifically, ICE's ATD contractor collected data for the Full-service component, and from fiscal years 2011 through 2013, these data showed that over 99 percent of aliens with a scheduled court hearing appeared in court as required.
child_questions: question: What data did ICE fail to collect, potentially impacting its accuracy?
answer: However, ICE did not collect similar performance data to report results for aliens enrolled in the Technology-only component—which composed 39 percent of the overall ATD program participants in fiscal year 2013—because when the program was first created, ICE officials stated that they envisioned that most aliens would be in the Full-service component with data tracked by the contractor.

question: What does ICE plan to do in order to form a more complete set of data?
answer: ICE plans to expand the contractor's role in data collection but does not plan to require collection of performance data for aliens enrolled in the Technology-only component; rather ICE plans to leave it to the discretion of field officials as to whether to require the contractor to collect these data.

question: How might a lack of requirements for data collection impede ICE's efforts?
answer: Without requirements to collect these data, ICE may not have complete information to fully assess program performance.

questions: question: How are aliens awaiting removal proceedings monitored?
answer: Aliens awaiting removal proceedings or found to be removable from the United States are detained in ICE custody or released into the community under one or more options, such as release on bond and under supervision of the ATD program.
child_questions: question: How is responsibility for such aliens distributed?
answer: Within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), ICE is responsible for overseeing aliens in detention and those released into the community.

question: What did ICE implement in 2004 as a cost-effective alternative to detainment?
answer: In 2004 ICE implemented the ATD program to be a cost-effective alternative to detaining aliens.
child_questions: question: How does the ATD program work?
answer: ICE administers the program with contractor assistance using case management and electronic monitoring to ensure aliens comply with release conditions—including appearing at immigration court hearings and leaving the United States if they receive a final order of removal.

question: What did the 2014 Consolidated Appropriations Act mandate?
answer: The Joint Explanatory Statement to the 2014 Consolidated Appropriations Act mandated that GAO evaluate ICE's implementation of the ATD program.