Transcripts For CSPAN2 Oversight Hearing Of ICE Detention Facilities 20240714

Today to receive testimonies on oversight of i. C. E. Since are they doing enough. Good afternoon. We should discuss the enforcements and detention his abilities and both of dhs is doing enough to enter i. C. E. His own detention standards are being met. Before we start, lets take those moment to acknowledge some of the challenges the subcommittee had in arranging todays hearing. Or holding two channels this afternoon because i. C. E. Declined to sit on the same panel with the contractor. For the purpose and lack of cooperation makes it more challenging for congress to do his job. The meeting with dhs leaders, is important to the subcommittee to bring everyones voices together. That is how we can best identify challenges and find ways to solve them. This issue is particularly important to me as to advices facilities, detained towards a part of 1300 migrants in my home district. I have visited these facilities. I have concerns about some of the conditions of confinement. Im not alone in these having these concerns. The Office Inspector last year found that these processes, for oversight of confinement were insufficient and being in compliance with i. C. E. His own standards. It might be that inspectors are set up to fail. For example, i have a contractor which conducts about 100 inspections annually is responsible for evaluating compliance with up to 42 standards composed of over 600 elements. Over the course of just a few days. As a result, these inspectors end up missing some clear violations at that detention standards. The phone not working properly. They also observed inspectors misreporting the detainees knew how to obtain a system or a sentence i. C. E. Officers when the detainees had indicated the exact opposite. Additional concern is the fact that even when these deficiencies are identified, isys processes have not insured that they are corrected. For example i. C. E. Has Detention Service monitors onsite at several detention facility to monitor compliance with detention standards. However these monitors told the eid that when they identified the violations, they have no means of enforcing corrective actions. Instead of pressuring facilities to correct deficiencies or issuing financial penalties for noncompliance, in some cases i. C. E. Granted waivers of the facilities dont have to abide by these standards. For example reported from 2015 to june 2018, i. C. E. Only issued to financial penalties and granted 65 waivers. Sixtythree of which those waivers had no entities. One of these waivers in my district permitted low custody individuals with no criminal history to go mingle with those individuals with more serious criminal records. The standards that typically keep these detainees separated is an important one the directors impact the safety of people in detention. Finally i have concerns that inspection site isys contractor announced far in advance, giving an example of continued to clean up just in time for inspection. I understand that they made several recommendations for isys to correct these issues. I look forward to hearing what steps advices taken and both of they are needing to sustain compliance with standards. I also look forward to hearing about the oversight elliot g connects. The oversight work in the state is the thin critical in shining light in the conditions of confinement. Recent reports have identified serious reports. Endangering health of detainees and inappropriate segregation practices infringing on the safety. However the scope of the inspections is limited by his lack of subject Matter Experts. Like medical dodgers. Im encouraged by the fact that the oig is developing a plan to contract with such experts who could engage in this oversight work. I hope to hear that this plan is bringing and putting into action. I want to think that witnesses who are here today and i look forward to your testimonies. The chair noun recognizes Ranking Member denman from texas. For an Opening Statement. Thank you. Also pleased able to Work Together as a result some of the problems correlating witnesses and panels to have the Key Stakeholders necessary for the protective hearing this issue deserves. It should be noted that in this longstanding practice not to have the agency and the contractors for the gc on the same panel which is why we ended up having two different panels. Im also hopeful that the office of civil rights and Civil Liberties will still provide the testimony prepared for this hearing even though they were disinvited earlier this week. I hope that in the future that the agency over which we are conducting oversight, in this case i. C. E. Would be the first to be invited to testify. This is an important issue to examine. I sure the majority of the regarding the necessity of enforcing the standards for safety and security of i. C. E. Detainees. Health and mobility a visit detained in the United States its not a partisan issue. Have been very public in my praise for the department of Homeland Security and the individuals who work each day to keep our country safe. Men and women of u. S. Immigration and customs enforcement, are some of the toughest jobs in the department. Isys task of enforcing u. S. Immigration law and removing individuals who pose a threat to the National Security Public Safety or speak to exploit our immigration system. The job is made even more difficult when they are publicly and unfairly vilified by public figures. Pauls narratives spread about i. C. E. Are utterly upper and prehensile full. Individuals targeted by i. C. E. Include gang members repeat violations. Those order to be removed by a judge. Opposed to increases, the job of i. C. E. Becomes even more difficult. They must devote their resources to rooting out those files that the biggest threat. The resources are stretched then. A safe and secure detention of individuals prior to removal from the country is one of the most important duties that i. C. E. Devote resources to. Off of detention is primarily done through contractors, the Agency Responsible for these individuals, i. C. E. Messenger the proper care is provided. I. C. E. Must use is oversight authorities as well as its contacting authorities to insurance detention standards are met. I said this out an inspection of three years and hires private contractors to do instructions annually. Additionally they have individuals who are tasked with onsite reveals of the daily operations. All this seems like the recipe for conducting rigorous oversight. Unfortunately it seems as it is frequently the case of government agencies, lack of communication and coordination among the divisions within i. C. E. My understanding that isys agreed with the recommendations of the Inspector General his office, is working towards addressing these issues. I look forward to hearing from our Witnesses Today on how we can ensure i. C. E. Attention standards are met in the future. I yelled back. End of the committee his rules, Opening Statements need to be submitted to the record. I woke my first panel of witnesses and thank them for joining today. Our first witness is ms. Jenny, president and sole owner of the Aquatic Group incorporated. She has provided professional administrative support to the federal government and private industry since 1990. Our family contact with i. C. E. To conduct inspections with isys this abilities. Her second witness, is the senior Legal Advisor for the constitution project at the project for government oversight. Her work focuses on National Security immigration and human rights. Prior to her work logo, she served as the National Security fellow for open the government. That went out an objection the witnesses will be inserted in record. Analysis each witness to summarize her statements for five minutes beginning with ms. Okamoto. [background sounds] thank you for the invitation to appear before this committee. I want to first apologize for what appeared to be our resistance to come to this hearing to discuss the details of our work with i. C. E. Our contract has flaws within the contract they get regulations that forbids the disclosure of these details and we were hesitant to get involved at the risk of our contract. This group is the woman owned minority small disadvantage business in maryland. My great grandparents immigrated to the United States from japan. My maternal bad parents were both born in california making them United States citizens. After pearl harbor, the president ial order was issued to incarcerate all japanese regardless of their citizenship status. My maternal family were living in california, and relinquished all of the property including any business that they had. They were given one trash bag to fill up personal items to take with them and had to leave Everything Else behind. Our family was spread out to different camps across country. My maternal grandparents were incarcerated in japanese in arizona. They were there long enough to meet and fall in love and get married and have a baby our mother, and become pregnant again with my aunt. Since they had to start over, they were offered employment as processing factory before theyre released to make sure to seabrook in new jersey. I was born there. My father was born and raised in hilo hawaii, my grandfather returned to japan soon after he was born. My father was the youngest in a bright large broken home and he was raised by several of his older brothers. My father served for more than 20 years in the United States army. He served two tours during phenomena and served in what the first all japaneseamerican rebate units. Clearfield relocated to federick rycroft. Because my parents did not have a lot of money, i worked during high school and have been working since i was 15 years old. Shortly after high school, and was able to obtain a secretarial job with the government as a department of health and human services. I worked there for over six years before leaving to work for three others successful minority owned Government Contracting firms. I learned about Government Contracting during this seven years and decided to take those chance army and company. I started this company in 2003, it was the same year that i lost my late husband, to suicide. I. C. E. To volunteer for his order of police, and have volunteered for them for over 20 years. Serving as their executive assistant to the executive board. The group is certified in the Small Business administration ada program in 2004. We successfully graduated certification and 2013. The first contract awarded to my company was in 2004 to maintain a hotline entitled americas now. Its a hotline that provides either free or low cast healthcare. Within the United States and his territory, we still maintain that contract after 15 years. And now includes another hotline entitled 311 babies that helps expectant and new mothers providing information via phone. For the last 15 years, we have done obtain contracts with the food and Drug Administration and department of health and human services. From 2,622,007, we had a confronts with food and health and ministration to hire hispanics to increase diversity within the workforce. Our current and longstanding logistics contracts have been Health Policy and the National Advisory committee on rural health and human services. We also provide logistics for policy meetings regarding telehealth and Rural America from 2010 to 2013. In 2005, we obtained a contract that is now office of federal detention trustee. His department of the department of justice. One of place within a blanket of purchase agreements to provide detention experts support services to the office of the federal detention trustee. Using performancebased attention standards, we sent teams to provide expert Specialized Service and consultation by conducting facility reviews of nonfederal contract gels and detention facilities with towels u. S. Marshals service and immigration customs and detainees. In 2007, we were asked to attend a meeting and i. C. E. Headquarters where we were asked to perform onsite Monitoring Services and providing monthly Technical Assistance that included fulltime monitors at for 40 of the largest i. C. E. Detention facilities. Monthly quarterly and biannual reviews of other i. C. E. Detention facilities pair the goal was to ensure that the facilities were in compliance with the standards. On that existing contract that we had at the time of the department of justice and we did this dive boat work for them for 2007, 2010. Your time is up. If you want to include a conclude remark. Just a few seconds. On the rest can be entered into the record. Okay. Ms. Hopkins. Chairwoman, Ranking Member and members of the subcommittee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. Im a senior legal analyst for the constitution project of the project in the government oversight. Of those nonpartisan that investigate government abusive of power. My colleagues and i done it series of investigations of conditions in the i. C. E. Conditions. We found evidence of an independent but medical where and Mental Health care and overuse of confinement. These are problems that have grown worse as i. C. E. Has detained more people. I. C. E. Detention centers are subject to various forms of oversights dhs. Their annual inspections. Onsite monitors and inspections by different offices within i. C. E. Inspections by the dhs Inspector General. This sounds like a lot of inspections. The system is failing to ensure compliance with isis attention standards. The Group Inspections are the only ones that consider a loss of detention facilities contract. But they often fail to uncover serious violations. Other inspections are more served, they also remain hidden from congress and the public and failed to make changes they recommend. As result inhumane and bad conditions remains. In some cases, the violations rise to the levels of unconstitutional medical needs. To illustrate the problems of the findings on three of the largest facilities, in september of 2018, the dhs Inspector General reported on an unannounced inspection of an Inspection Center in california. They found sheets, and adequate care. Overuse of solitary confinement. They conducted their own previously announced inspection. They not only found that it was in compliance with 40 i. C. E. Detention standards but accused the inspection general of writing and that report. To dismiss the nooses of the housekeeping violation, not a suicide risk. Disregarding that a man hung himself in march. We recently uncovered a third investigation by the office of civil rights and Civil Liberties. See rcl in december of 2015, and november of 2017. In 2015, they had one i. C. E. That the medical leadership was not competent. In 2017, they found no evidence that corrections remained to address this issue. This led to in their words, inadequate care that resulted in bone injuries and detainee death. See rcl took on a mentally ill solitary confinement instead of being treated. Sometimes her shockingly long lengths of time. Overuse of solitary confinement as fatal sometimes consequences. In may 2017, and july 2018. They suffered from schizophrenia. Instead of receiving psychiatric treatment, both were placed in solitary environment for weeks. Both hung themselves in their isolation cells. Despite the two deaths, inspectors. And then unequipped medical care led to another death. In colorado or even into methadone withdrawal we need arrived there. For two weeks, his symptoms were grew worse and medical staff exaggerated them. There are many other credible reports of medical neglect. Including one case where detainee untreated bedsores became so bad the infected that is like had to be amputated. Despite all of this evidence, they said that they were in compliance 41. In 2017, 2018. Let me close. Number one, our should require dhs to impose financial site consequences for documented violations of Detention Centers no matter what inspection and covers them. 2017, dhs and suspended a policy that alludes to detention policies to known to be suffering from serious physical or Mental Illness who are disabled elderly pregnant or nursing. They should be reinstated. Number three congress should be ability to transfer funds in order to expand detention. Number four, congress should strengthen the authority and transparency of the office of the Civil Liberties. Thank you very much. I think all the witnesses for their testimony. I will remind each member you have five minutes to question the panel. I now recognize myself for questionings. Thank you for being here today and i recognize your concern about the contracts but your eyes contract does not prohibit you from testifying at the congressional hearing correct . Correct. Thank you. As i noted in my Opening Statement, you are responsible for for reviewing 42 standards that include over 600 elements in just a few days. You are not the only or firstenergy to wait raise concerns about the process. In fact more than three years ago the Homeland Security Council Recommended that eyes move away from abroad checklist. For inspections. Did they allow your company to conduct thorough inspections . They do. All my stuff has to not only go through the checklist, but they have to know the standards. They have to know the actual information within the standards within the components within the standards. 600 elements in three days. You have enough time to get that done. Yes. You have enough inspectors. And you dont need a narrower scope to make sure you know verifying all of those items. No. The three days on site are to perform interviews with detainees and staff and to see the facilities itself. The rest of our report writing we are putting all of it together happens after we leave. Having to explain the reports in the rg reports that said for example, the phone wasnt working and they were just neglected to see if the phone directed them to her gave him the ability to make a complaint. I dont know all of, i dont have the oig report memorized. But i know that my staff checked into it. What about a file documentation recorded complete that went out checking the a file. My staff checked the files. According to the standards. Your disputing the oig reported that. Im not disputing it, im telling you that my staff know what they have to look at within the standards. One about seo licenses being reported as existing that went out confirming the documentation. Cement i dont agree with that. My staff always checks for the credentials that are required within the standards are always act by the staff. The oig was incorrect in making that observation. I believe i guess they said we did it. Then. What about only in interviewing detainees who speak english for using a guard to interpret in spanish for someone who is in charge of the facility. I think theres different ways to find out information of what is going on at the facility. Some of the interview process is informal and some of it is mobilized. We had packed since the oig report came out, we have since formalized the interview process as suggested. Have you formalized the profits that you can make sure that you have enough spanishspeaking inspectors . We have a Language Line that we are also able to use at any facility. In terms of spanishspeaking and certifying they actually do speak spanish, do you have a system for that . I dont understand what you know asking me. You dont have a system for establishing someone if an inspector actually does speak spanish . We have about a quarter of our staff that speak spanish. How do you confirm that . Asked the detainees questions in spanish. Do you speak spanish . I do not. Can even determine they are determining that they are speaking correct language . Quickly to move on, i. C. E. Has concurred with these recommendations for finding three defining the scope of work. Why hasnt this happened. Why hasnt okamoto concurred with recommendations. To revise the statement of work. So they have more time over targeted in your in evaluating those elements. Weve been doing this for a long time. We do this for other agencies. Inspectors said to, i believe, the Inspector General that there is more time required, is that not what you heard . Or time for inspection in order to meet the criteria for all those bullet points you have to hit. I mean, my staff has not complained about the amount of time they have they have three days onsite and thats how lo long. They not complained to you specifically about it . From other reports they had said that. So, its something to think about or at least get feedback from your own stephan, i believe because there does seem to be quite a few requirements that perhaps theres not enough time to look into. If that is the case then restructuring the requirements is certainly in line, four days instead of three days is not exactly a huge stretch of the imagination and something we could easily do. So, aside from the time difference to your employees and inspectors come to you with any other issues regarding the inspection process . Is it not clear enough . Weve established you think they have enough time but what else . We work closely with ice. My team works closely with ice. Any issues that come up we have a Good Relationship with letting ice know what the issues are. What about the oig report . Generally speaking, do you think that report is valid, dont go into specifics but generally speaking what issues do you agree with or dont agree with in that report . I think that what they see at the time they are there or what they looked at could be different from what we are looking at. We are looking at things with a different perspective because our team knows what to look for when they go on site so they are based off of whatever they are seen and based off their past experience and our team has over 35 Years Experience in detention management. They know kind of what theyre looking at when they walk into a room. You said things that are very shocking, for instance, the nuisance. You said that you all found nooses which im not the group did not find but would you expand on that and are you applying how many nooses are we talking about what the application there . Sure of it as a point of clarification that was i was conveying the oig report findi finding. Do know how many nooses were talking about . I think 15 of 20 and i do think you proceeded to connect that to suicide so the indication is that there is almost a factory line of nooses being created for suicide which i probably not the case but that was the indication in your statement . My statement was brief but if you look at the report my organization did on this tribut what it may be logical to think that the sheets were being braided for the reasons that the okamoto group claimed they were that was privacy within the cells . Is that possible . It would be important to clarify that we Say Something like theres a bunch of nooses found . Yes. Its a pretty important clarification. My organization said that in the Inspector General said that they were primarily used for privacy but. Thats an important clarification because the stuff gets out of hand. You also mentioned suicide which and other facilities which are terrible but were you connecting were there deficiencies that were noted later which were not caught by the inspectors that were directly connected to those incidences . Yeah, staffing of medical care and Mental Health care. According to ice standards or according to your standards . According to ice standards. Could you give more detail unethically what were talking about here . I would refer to the detainee desk review for the gimenez joseph case. It became public recently, i dont know the detainee death review for the other detainee who committed suicide and is publicly available and i would encourage the committee to request a copy of that and to get details on that. Thank you. Thank you. The chair agonizes for five minutes the gentleman from new jersey. Thank you for being here and for your testimony. How many employees do you have that are inspectors . We have 45 parttime employees and 12 fulltime employees. Comedy facilities do you have a contract role relationship with ice to do whatever it is that i will ask you that you do . Our contract is with ice. For how many facilities. As many as they asked us to inspect. Did you have any limit in your contract that you are being contracted to do 50 of the 200 facilities or whatever . They do it in intervals and we inspect at least about 120 a year. Of facilities . Of facilities. With 45 parttime inspectors and 12 fulltime. Yes. What are the credentials that these inspectors are supposed to have . Within our statement of work it declares what the credentials have to be. But im asking you what they have to be. They have to have ten Years Experience in correctional setting, they have to be warden and we have superintendence of corrections. Did they do the inspections or do they oversee other inspections that are done . They actually do the inspections. And so, what is this threeday limitation . Is it something the contract calls for and is it something you decided for was the best practice. Its within the contract. We have a similar contract with the department of justice and its the same thing. When does your contract run out with ice . I believe march. Arch. What is the value of your contract . I dont have that in front of the. What you estimated to be about . Who you have with you on staff . Who is with you from your staff . My Vice President and my chief Financial Officer. In your chief Financial Officer will whisper in your ear with your contract. 3 million. Thats a lot of money. Okay. Ms. Hawkins, some of first of all, you are only testifying about the oig report and nothing that you or your organization has seen for yourself. One of my colleagues has gone to [inaudible] but my reporting relies mainly on government documents and a whole lot of phone interviews. In the facilities you mentioned was inadequate Mental Health and services inadequate of other Healthcare Services inadequate food and inadequate Something Else but are any of those the facilities that the Nakamoto Group has a contract to inspect . Yes, there are some ice largest facilities so inspected on an annual basis. Miss nakamoto, in 2009 ice detention facilities frequently failed inspections beginning in 2009 preparations precluded deep ts from to doing contact facilities. In the two most recent performance ratings evaluations received are less than adequate. In the last five years are you aware of any of the over 72 hour facility that has received an overall final weighting of less than two adequate less than adequate . Did your inspections are you asking me if we have any i am asking you if you have the knowledge of any of these facilities of any facility that you all are responsible for inspecting that has received an overall final rating of less than adequate . Yes. How many . Six this year alone. What did you do with those findings . We put them in the report and submitted it to ice. What has happened in those facilities . Well, one that i know off the top of my head had a follow on that we went back after the established action plan and our team goes back in after so many days and we have to go in and inspected again. Let me ask you a real quick question. I apologize. And 19 seconds im sorry, thank you. Thank you. I yield back. The chair recognizes the chair recognizes for five minutes gentleman from nevada. Thank you. I will yield some time to miss watson so she can finish her question. Thank you to my colleague at i want to know if these facilities had to ratings with sequential ratings of less than adequate and if so, are they not supposed to lose their ability to serve in this capacity and to your knowledge have any of them . Thank you. I dont know. I could get that information and submit it for the record but i dont have that information. Thank you. Reclaiming my time. Thank you. Ms. Hawkins, last month your organization released a report on the increased use of solitary confinement or segregation called by ice and according to the report and the Henderson Detention Center which is in Southern Nevada was among the top 15 and they used segregation 121 unique times, 121 unique placements and 16 of those placements lasted more than 75 days. I wonder if you could explain what ice detention standards dictate regarding the use of segregation and if you are aware of any waivers that were granted by ice or compliance with the standards. Thank you for your question. I can speak more generally to ice waiver process and segregation standards and specifically regard to the hendersonville facility. In general, in 2013 ice directed that facilities reform their practice on segregation and improve reporting on when vulnerable detainees have been placed in segregation or anyone was placed in a long time and prior to used it only as a last resort. They also recommended that facilities try to when a detainee is held in administrative segregation protective custody for for Health Reasons or other reasons that are not punishment for a disciplinary infection that they should receive the same privileges that detainees in the general publish and receive which would mean they dont spend 23 hours locked in their cell. We have found speaking to former ice officials and inspectors and others that that exception has often implement it in most facilities say that its just not practical for them give people privileges in administrative segregation and most ice facilities are jails and county jails, you know, they continue to have segregation solitary so that provision isnt being adequately implemented. Is that when they grant a waiver . Any standards for granting waivers . I dont know i think i would need to examine the more detailed inspections on the solitary and i dont know if there i know that on the website is now a list of waivers and i dont know if one of those or if its just a general practice where it sound to be technically compliant with the standard because the detention standard to have flex ability in their language. Is this something miss nakamoto that you could check out your inspectors go out to look into the use of solitary confinement . We do. There are standards within ice standards there are standards that are for segregation and our staff goes through and ensures that the standards are within compliance at the facilities. Today you find those numbers high with [inaudible] more than 75 days . Over just one year and a half. Segregation and solitary confinement are not the same. How about explain to me what the differences. Segregation is there are different variances of segregation can be for disciplinary or for administrative and theres different type and then within those types theres different components within the standards. It does not seem to know much about this business. My time is up. We will do another round and i appreciate it folks would say if they have other questions. I want to follow up unannounced versus unannounced visits. When we conducted that inspection price, showed us does the facility get. I believe 30 days. When conducting an inspection of an intention facility is it better to announce the visit at a time is a better other things being equal its better to conduct an unannounced inspection as you mentioned in your Opening Statement there is a tendency to clean things up before the inspectors arrive. One caveat to that is i know that the office of Inspector General conducts unannounced inspections that have been very valuable in bringing poor conditions to light. The Awesome Office of civil rights does intend to announce their inspections further in advance but they do so in part because they bring independent experts along and so part of why they announce inspection is to request that medical files be pulled for the medical inspector to interview to make sure that they are able to speak with the clinical staff and they are doing a really indepth look and they do many fewer inspections and so there can be a place for inspections announced in advanced but if it will be a quick check to check the food or check the cleanliness of the cells and that nature its better to be on the no. Committee staff recently visited a few detention facilities in mississippi and louisiana. Stafford from detainees that prior to their arrival walls were painted, new curtains were put up and even flowerbeds were placed outside. Do you think its wise to give facilities advance notice when conducting these inspections . Currently we have another contract with the u. S. Marshals service where we dont announce. Is that better . We just do what the context says unannounced visits and or unannounced inspections in this contract does announce inspections and ice is doing what it says in our contract so they announce that given your experience inspecting facilities do you find more regularly determine the true conditions of a facility if you are unannounced . I think so smack thank you. I will yield the rest of my time and recognize the gentleman from texas for five minutes, mr. Concho. Thank you madam chairman. Miss nakamoto have you ever recommended that the facility not be utilized by ice or made specific representations about what must be approved at a facility . Trying to get a sense of the process there. What we do is we provide a recommendation based on whether or not facilities met the standards the components within a standard at the standard. To answer miss titus question, i believe, none of the failed two consecutive inspections, we never had that but we have had where all the detainees were removed after a failed inspection. So, we recommend on every all of our reports what the final regulation is based on however many components they met or did not meet. What were some of the more serious examples that you would excite . Is good for everyone to understand. Life safety issues, medical issues, food those are the major things if there is a life safety issues and then it would. What would be an example of a life safety issue . I dont know the standards by heart but if there are certain rules within the life safety issue that or the life safety standard that like for example fire drills are supposed to do fire drills a certain way and a certain amount of time. Dot the year that is just like an example of one of the things they have to the reason i asked for examples its important for saying when you say the words life safety second mean something very extreme then you say fire drills thats less extreme. Trying to get out if you dont have any we dont have any. Going back to the scope. One of the main problems and one of the main reason there was a report in the first place is the office of detention oversight finds additional deficiencies in the same facility that the Nakamoto Group did not and you have a much broader scope than they do and can you speak to that . Is that the right way to do things . Should the scopes be similar or the better that are different because theres overlap the whats your general take on the scope of inspection for the Nakamoto Group as. The contract . Comparing our inspection compared to their inspection is my understanding that their inspection is more targeted based off something that our report says that it doesnt you dont meet the standards within this many standards or whatever then based on their team the difference is there sitting in more people to inspect for less standards and less components because its a more targeted inspection ic. Does that make your job more difficult when you have a much broader scope . I dont think it makes our job difficult but we have access to those reports and there has been an oto inspection at the facility were going to we get the report and we can see whatever findings they found to make sure that theyve i think the question is about their illness. If your scope is so much more broad than otiose is there a lack of depth within the inspection that is subsequent to that scope. I think the scope for our scope of work talks to the whole amount of standards and all the ice detention standards. They created all these standards and all must be reviewed annually and the targeted inspections are just that, targeted so they are only looking at a certain you are saying you comparing apples and oranges. Okay. Yes. Thank you. I yield the rest of my time. The chair agonizes for five minutes the gentleman from new jersey. Thank you. Your inspections are annual which means these facilities know youre coming once a year, right . And you were there for three days. Yes. You go like clockwork . Is it a year from the time you went before . Or can they anticipate. We receive our schedule from ice. Can you tell me really quickly list the other federal agencies you have a similar contract with . For which you do inspections without notifying people in advance and what are the agencies you have contracts with . U. S. Marshals service. And thats it . Yes. Thats your only other one . Yes. In december 2018 a member there was a letter for you disputed the reporting and it rightdoublequote from inspection of the [inaudible] facility directly response to the oig findings for example, you allege oig findings in the facility regarding hanging loses or whatever you call them in an adequate dental care was inaccurate and embarrassment to their office and ice. Is it part of your contracts with ice to receive findings at the oig or other groups find in there inspections of facilities and thats a yes or no. No. You also said in your letter the report can include only that which was verified while we were on site notwithstanding any changes that may have occurred before or after the inspection and if your inspectors were at the facility in october 2018 how can you then dispute that what was observed by the oig five months earlier . For example, you claimed oig was wrong in noting that a detainee in wiltshire had not left his wheelchair since his recent arrival and are not accepted any of the Hygiene Products in the bag given to him but your inspectors were not present for that inspection so how could you possibly claim that the oig findings were not true . Because of my staff went back and looked at the actual recor records. Did you see the man sitting in the wheelchair or had he been moved . Five months later. Finally, your letter says dhs, ice Detention Program has dedicated significant resources and they certainly have to ensure the proper care of ice detainees in compliance with the standards. Do you think its appropriate for your company to make that statement that suggest ice is doing everything properly even though i know particularly a beneficiary of their resources . Do you believe that a reasonable position for you to take . Its yes or no. Can i take your silence as a yes or a no . Ms. Hawkins, are you familiar with the nakamoto letter . Yes. Do you have a position on whether or not to raise concerns about their objectivity . It did strike me as strange to see a criticism of a previous inspection in the nakamoto inspection. I looked into this a bit when i wrote an article on ice inspections published earlier this year and one of the criticisms that nakamoto made of the oig inspection where that oig did not have people with experience in detention or corrections and when i asked her on people said thats true and its possible that oig thought certain details were wrong or misunderstood things but then so thats why it was so striking to see the reports from the office of civil rights and Civil Liberties which were from before both the oig report and the subsequent nakamoto report. If anything, they were more critical than the oig was. Thank you both for your testimony. Im now going to welcome our second panel of witnesses and thank you for joining us today. Our first witness is ms. Dianas account, Inspector General for evaluations. At the dhs office of Inspector General. Prior to serving in this role ms. Shaw served okay, im sorry, i apologize. We will wait. Thank you so much and i apologize for the im sorry. I now welcome our second panel of witnesses and i think thank you for joining us today. Our first witness is ms. Diana shaw, assistant Inspector General for special reviews and evaluation at the dhs office of Inspector General. Prior to serving in this role ms. Shaw served in the leadership position within the oig including aig for legal affairs, acting counsel to the ig, director of the special reviews group and acting aig for external affairs. Our second witness, mr. Ty johnson is assistant director for custody and management enforcement and removal operations at ice. Mr. Johnson began his career with former immigration and Naturalization Service in 1992. Since transferring to ice headquarters and 2007 he served in leadership roles including chief staff for the office of detention policy. Without objection the witnesses statements will be inserted into the record. I now ask each witness to summarize his or her statements for five minutes beginning with ms. Shaw. Chairwoman torres, Ranking Member crenshaw and members of the subcommittee. Thank you for inviting me to discuss oigs recent work regarding oversight of ice detention facilities. Ice is responsible for overseeing the administrative detention of tens of thousands removable aliens. As of this summer, i said properly 54000 beds occupied across approximately 200 detention facilities nationwide. Each facilities are governed by standards that aim to establish consistent conditions of confinement in the ice detention system. In an effort to ensure compliance with these standards ice has developed a multilayered approach to detention oversight which includes the domination of onsite monitoring and inspections performed by ice personnel and contracted service providers. These activities have resulted in the identification and correction of numerous noncompliance with detention standards. However, the volume of new and repeat deficiencies identified through the oig independent inspections raises questions about the overall effectiveness of ice multilayered oversight approach. Since fiscal year 2015 oig has been conducting unannounced inspections of ice detention facilities and these unannounced inspections have identified a range of deficiencies including unreported security incidences, dangerous mishandling of food, dilapidated physical connections and unaddressed security risks. For instance, oig staff found that staff at the essex county facility in new jersey failed to report to ice a loaded handgun discovered by a detainee in a facility bathroom. At the [inaudible] Processing Center in california the facility at which at least seven suicide attempts by hanging were made in less than one year and oig inspectors observed braided bedsheets referred to as nooses by center staff and detainees and 15 of the 20 cells we visited. Serious issues like these raise questions about the effectiveness of ice is multilayered approach and prodded oig to review the entities involved in providing oversight in each layer. One there is the Nakamoto Group, a private company with which ice contracts to annually inspect facilities holding ice detainees. At the time of our review was expecting 100 facilities a year to evaluate compliance with 3942 detention standards. Ice is office of detention oversight or oto provides another layer of oversight at the time of our review audio was inspected approximately 30 facilities a year to determine 1516 core standards. Finally, ice standards or dsm onsite at select facilities to continuously monitor compliance with standards. The oigs work is revealed shortcomings within each layer of this system. For instance, the inspection the scope outlined in isis contract with nakamoto is much too broad to ensure a thorough inspection. As a result nakamotos inspections do not always fully examined actual conditions of the facility or identify all compliance deficiencies. In contrast audio inspections are narrower in scope and use effective methods to thoroughly inspect facilities but however, audios inspections are relatively infrequent making it difficult for odo to ensure facilities are dressed in all deficiencies. Finally, while the dsm provides onsite monitoring of facilities frequently identified deficiencies and proposed corrective actions have no authority to compel implementation of those actions. As a result it falls to ice field offices, some of which may be resistant to working with the dsm, to implement necessary changes. The challenges oig has identified in each layer of ice oversight system rendered the approach less effective than it otherwise could be. Meanwhile, ice continues to spend millions of dollars on detention oversight without achieving comprehensive distant compliance. Ice can and should be doing more and for instance, ice did not purely utilize tools available to it to drive compliance among its contracts. Our recent review of Ice Management of detention contracts found that ice is failing to use quality tools and impose consequences for contract noncompliance. Moreover we found instead of Holding Facilities accountable through available financial penalties ice frequently issued waivers to deficient facilities exempting them from having to comply with detention standards. Until i fully implement appropriate corrective action ice multilayered approach oversight will not as effective as it needs to be. Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony and happy to answer questions the subcommittee may have. Thank you. I now organize mr. Johnson to summarize his payment for five minutes. Chairwoman torres small, Ranking Member crenshaw and distinguished members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to just write to gate regarding ice is oversight of its detention facilities. Ice enforcement in removal operations manages and oversees the nations immigration Detention Center system one of the most highly transient and diverse populations of any detention or correctional system in the world. Detainees placed in ice custody represent virtually every nation on earth with various Security Threat levels and often arrive in custody with complex medical, complex detention and medical needs. They take the health, general safety of its welfare extremely seriously and is committed to continually evaluating and improving the care of detainees they receive. Three robust inspections programs the agency ensures detention facilities use that detainees use the court with detention standards which are often much more rigorous than those that apply to other detainee populations. The standards were promulgated in cooperation with ice stakeholders and the American Correctional Association and representatives of nongovernmental organizations to ensure that all individuals in ice custody are treated with dignity and respect provided the best possible care. Ice uses three sets of detention standards for its adult detained population, National Detention standards and the 2000 performancebased National Detention standards, as well as the pbm 2011 with ice detention standards are specified the Living Conditions appropriate for detainees and help to ensure a safe and secure environment and cover medical care, food service and our Mental Health and safety and segregation in the use access to legal and religious services as well as visitation. Isis requirements succeed exceed industry standards which is evident from the large number of local jails unwilling to make isis pbm d11 was recently revised in 2016 to include important updates standards disability and dedication, assessment as well as medical air four to ensure the facilities with the requisite standards ice provides oversight through a multilayered inspection and monitoring program. Ice conducts annual and biannual over certain propositions and utilizes a self inspection process for facilities with small population from those that house detainees for under 72 hours. Additionally the oversight and the dhs crc l and the dhs oig all conduct reviews and inspections and have open access to ice facilities. Ice is doing the nakamoto facilities around the country and this includes annual inspections, pre occupancy inspections, special views as ordered by ice using the applicable didnt standards. Ontrack spent three days on each facility and in addition to environMental Health and safety subject Matter Expert they also employed the services of a health of the subject matter when deficiencies cant they work with offices and facilities to ensure timely and corrective actions are implement it. Ice greatly appreciates the work conducted by the oig regarding the inspection process and carefully evaluate its recommendations in a june 26, 2018 report entitled ices inspections and monitoring of detention facilities did not lead to sustained compliance or systemic improvement and the ig made five recommendations with which ice concurred and which have been used to implement improvements to our inspections process. In response to oig finding ices reevaluating the existing inspection scope and methodology in the statement of work with an inspections contract to ensure inspection procedures are adequately and appropriately resourced to fully evaluate detention conditions. Ice has also created a Quality Assurance team consisting of seasoned federal employees to perform Quality Assurance reviews of ices during each annual inspection. Ices is also developing inspection process for select facilities where egregious or numerous deficiencies are identified updating and enhancing current procedures to ensure verification of all corrective actions including and attracting of all corrective actions by facility and responsible field office. As well as developing protocols for dro offices to require facilities to implement formal corrective action plans resulting from deficiencies identified from its onsite monitors. Ice understands your time has expired you want to conclude that the sentence. Sure. Thank you for the opportunity to testify regarding this important matter and i look forward to answering any questions. Thank you i think the witnesses for their testimony and i will remind everyone that he or she has five minutes to question the panel i now recognize myself for questions. Weve been talking about the 600 elements in the scope of work and this differs this process from the odo and it has a much narrower scope of inspection and allows them to more deeply assess the health and safety of detainees. Oigs recommendations is to revise the inspection scope and methodology for contract factors within ice statement of work. Do you believe the current statement of work keeps its contractors probably compliant with its oversight responsibility schematic. Based on our observations related to that report we found that it was an incredibly challenging goal to be set for the inspectors to review the full scope of the applicable standards in a threeday time with a five person team is a tall order. Based on our experience and highly trained staff i think they felt that they, too, would have struggled to try to meet those goals. Statement of work and the breath of the statement of work made it difficult to get any deep dive into these issues. Should they revise the statement of work to ensure Quality Assessment for detention standards and you dont have t to just say yes. Yes, thats our recommendation. Have you seen plans to amend the new statement of work back. That recommendation continues to be open and treated resolved meaning that we are continuing to work with ice on their course of action and retain iterations of possible ways that they might revise the scope of nothing definitive has been decided at this time and based on our most recent update because of they are putting out requests for proposals on that contract i think that will potentially slow down the process slightly but we would continue to suggest that regardless of who the contractor is they need to revise that statement of work to ensure that they are getting detailed findings. When you say it slow down the process you mean the rfp would go out without changing the scope of work and there might be a new contract without changing the scope of work connect. And speaking based on our understanding from what weve been hearing from ice but the latest update that we received was that they were putting out a request for proposal and so they are not provided a new update on the status of their revision statement of work. Does that concern you . I think based on the little bit i know about how contractors are done its important to have a clearly defined a statement of work to keep in mind when you going to the process. Thank you. Mr. Johnson, what is the status of the plant and invited by mr. Shaw . Ms. Shaw stated were in the middle of a plan to increase or make the needed improvements in our statement of work has been drafted in the current competition or in the new competition and we are expect to do that with the next three months. Will you commit to revising the scope of work before finishing the process . Yes, the new requirements will be included in this new contract going forward. Miss shaw, are you planning followup work to evaluate whether or not nakamoto inspections have been improved . We currently do not have planned work in that area but it is the case that is part of our recommendation follow up process and we are consistently obtaining updates from ice based on how well they are in permitting the corrective action plan so we would expect to get updates to that process we will continue our unannounced inspections programs next year and visit facilities, many of which will have been reviewed by [inaudible] and i will give us another opportunity part of our affection scope of work and we look at what they had done to evaluate whether racine corrections when we are onsite or not. In the short time i left i want to bring up the issue of penalties versus waivers so in 2. 5 years ice has issued only to financial penalties but offered 65 ways waivers including allowing the use spray that is ten more time toxic than pepper straight, strip searches in [inaudible] and in my own District Committee the commingling of detainees with varying criminal histories including which as you mentioned threat levels. Mr. Johnson, with the point of standards if ice simply uses waivers to sanction noncompliance . I think first is important to note that the only provisions that ice has ever issued waivers on things that are certainly mixed threat levels doesnt affect health and safety . Classification is important for housing and port recreation. I apologize im out of time. Thank you. And now recognize the Ranking Member of the subcommittee, the gentleman from texas, mr. Crenshaw for five minutes for questions. Thank you. I want to continue your answer, mr. Johnson. Sure, thank you. Historically classification is generally sort of held for housing as well as recreation and those are the areas where detainees and inmates generally are most vulnerable and in your specific instance the only waiver of a classification requirement had to do with whether an individual who was going on there housing unit or to the medical area needed to be escorted by an officer during the standards required so thats an area that we waived in the past because it cuts against that whole idea of civil detention at escort level threes and it should be based on the threat for the detainee as opposed to the fact that he may have had marital dispute with his wife and thats why the individual is classified as a level three and we have to look at the specific circumstances that we conclude that ice waiver has somehow made an individuals unsafe or vulnerable because you were never in that example is not necessarily the case of a violent criminal was put in the cell with a nonviolent. That is correct. Classifications of housing is what always any additional explanations to the other waivers . There are a number of waivers that weve granted are the things that are written in our standards 20 years ago that are no longer sound detention practices with the most popular waiver that we grant has to do with the barbershop provision which requires that barbershop be in a dedicated area that i meant specifically what the additional exclamation that would explain those particular waivers with the pepper spray. Im not familiar with the pepper spray but. Of the bond to the discussion of scope. It reports that theres too much scope for the contractors and very narrow scope for the odo and is the admonition particularly to do everything like the odo to narrow the scope or is there a middle ground that was amended by the ig . Our recommendations specific to audio with higher frequency of inspections do you recommend that same scope be used for nakamoto as well . We do not. We left it to ice to provide the statement of work according to what he felt would allow them to achieve compliance in their standards. Mr. Johnson, what is ices position on that . I think our position is that we have 39 or 49 to standards depending on which version of the standards are applicable and we have it different what differentiates between the standards connect. 2011 which are applicable at the dedicated facilities that house only for the most part are close to nearly all ice detainees are more robust standards are tailored to those facilities and we have a lower version of the standards which are the National Detention standards which are generally for our local jails where we have shared populations in many instances of relatively small ice publishing compared to the overall large inmate population. Is there any benefit to commingling the contractors with odo to ensure i guess, more consistency in inspections . From my perspective, no. I think we are getting exactly what we expect out of our inspections and we have to inspect against all other requirements and we have developed that checklist to identify what we believe. Correct. Given the vast amount of detainees in custody that peaked the summer to what extent is that increase pressure on your operations in these facilities . We have to activate a lot of new facilities and any facilities and never held ice detainees previously so for those its a huge learning curve for those to figure out for what the inspections require so for some of those folks its challenging at times so it did in fact affect the operations. Thank you. Thank you for your testimonies. Mr. Johnson, how many employees do you have that oversee or work with these facilities that have detainees . I have about 200 or so direct reports and the folks that focus on detention and about half of those about 100, 120. Im sorry . One hundred120. In you are distributing them as detention operations. How many facilities are you responsible for ensuring that the standards of care are appropriate . Today we use about 250 facilities. So, your 120 inspector inspection people how do they determine which facilities they do, smallest for the lease . Nakamoto inspects all facilities that we use that house people for over 72 hours. I have detentions on site Service Managers that are our largest facilities and make up for 50 facilities and reach about 70 of our population. Im sorry, he told me there are 250 facilities altogether . Thats correct. Of those have you had occasion to close any for deficiency in service unsafe conditions . Weve closed several facilities. How many several facilities . Over the last ten years i was a. What about the last three years . Three years i dont recall off and how many we shut down. So, Nakamoto Group provides a report of their findings and those are recommendations to your department. Thats correct. Do you in under any circumstances ignore their findings and relations. Generally, no. Generally know or never know . I mean i recall one instance where we disagreed with that particular recommendation and we went back to them and had a discussion and explained our position. There is a mention in my briefing here that there was an instance where ice made recommendations that came from nakamoto to you all for an extended time. Over a hundred day and does that come to your recollection . Vaguely i remember a statement that seem to suggest that there was an inspection that was sitting in a draft status for an extended period of time. What is the amount of time that the recommendations stand waiting for a response for you all . Do have a requirement in terms of Response Time . There is no requirement. Folks generally try to get those words finalized sooner rather than later but there could have been a technical issue with tha what is the followup on telling a facility that it has asked number of violations and they have to clean them up what is the process for followup . Once the report is finalized uniform corrective action plan is generated and sent to the field office in facility for any serious life safety issue and they are required to come up with the corrective action plan to in short order in one week or two week for any regular sort o my question is when you have these deficiencies what is to your attention and you tell the facility you have x number of days or whatever to correct it what is your follow up to ensure that what you tell them to do they do. At our staff facilities where we have onsite staff we have presence there and can ensure the things they said they were going to do were in fact done. How many facilities have onsite staff . Smack about 50. Are they fulltime in that one facility . Fulltime folks that spend the overwhelming majority of the time and they could have another facility close by that they have to provide roaming coverage of but generally in the last couple of years have you used your financial penalties to get a facility to do what you needed them to do . We have. How many . More than two. I heard earlier that is only occur twice but its at least been ten, 15 that im aware of but we could get you an exact number. Ive asked mr. Crenshaw if you wanted a secondround and he said it wasnt necessary so i will indulge myself for a minute. Im not quite sure what we have all this consternation about inspections of facilities meeting standards and whether or not the standards are relevant to whether or not the standards are doable and make sense and why we dont have the followup so my question to you, ms. Shaw, we need extra people or do we need streamlining of operations or do we need better commitment . Based on our recommendations the primary issue that we have is really a process one and ensuring that there is adequate followup that their segmentation to support claims by the facility that they implement it corrective action so they need a more robust process for ensuring followup. Does that mean you need more staff, sir . Id like to have more staff at our larger facilities to make sure we have that onsite presence and presence to monitor conditions each day. Certainly, the staff would be welcome. Okay, my last question. How do you do qualitycontrol checking of your contracts with nakamoto . What i would say is ten years ago the government use to inspect its own facilities but after a lot of criticism about my question is what do you do to ensure that nakamoto is doing the job you contracted them to do . Today we have seasoned federal employees that accompany nakamoto on every inspection. They have a role in the inspection process but they will, from this point forward, be monitoring the inspector to make sure that they are providing the services that we are paying for. Immigration council international, immigration justice center, the Government Accountability project. The serve poverty law gender, the trans gender law center and the asianamerican advancing justice. Without objection so admitted. [inaudible] [inaudible conversations] today susan rice joins other lawmaker for a day of conversations at the Texas Tribune festival in austin. Live coverage at 3 30 p. M. Eastern on cspan2. Saturday on booktv the black books matter book party in washington, dc featuring audrey, angel rich, and White House Correspondent april ryan. Author of underfire. At the end of the day, those Founding Fathers never realized there would be an april ryan questioning bill clinton, george w. Bush, and barack obama or donald trump and i stand on those pillars. My story is your story. Then 11 00 a. M. , the father of the student killed in the shooting at Marjorie Stoneman high school in florida offers his authorities on School Safety and guns in this book why meadow died by pi. I said i would find everything out it and was all these leniency programs of these kids, like, they had the friction him before school he was so dangerous. They frisked him and he was not allowed in with a backpack. He threatened to shoot the school up, wasnt arrested. Threatened students lives, never arrest. Then ons at 9 00 eastern, in his book, the years that matter most, paul tough reports on the challenges and costs of a college education. We are still debating whether a 12th grade education is enough. Its not enough and all of the signs from the economy and labor market are its not enough, but now, unlike our pred are sos who war able to respond, lets aid county our young people, we are fighting about and turning it into questions of identity and snobbery and politics and partisanship, when clearly theyre just a sign we our young people need our support and help and credentials and education and skills to survive the current economy. Watch booktv every weekend on cspan2. Campaign 2020. Watch our live coverage of the president ial candidates on the campaign trail and make if your own. Cspans campaign 2020. The unfiltered view of politics. 2020 democratic provides and mayor of south bend indiana Pete Buttigieg talked about what he would do as president. [applause] [cheers and applause] thank you. This is the official stop. Thank you for joining. Thank you, jerry, thanks to our faction organizes and volunteers like sarah whose fulltime job is to get to know you and invote you to be part of the change were trying to make for the country. Im here to mostly listen and have a conversation what you think is most important, but i want to make sure we dont