Transcripts For CSPAN2 Oversight Hearing Of ICE Detention Facilities 20240714

The subcommittee on oversight and management accountability will come toward her. The subcommittee is meeting today to receive testimony on oversight of i. C. E. Detention facilities and is dhs doing enough . Good afternoon. We are here to discuss the oversight immigration and Customs Enforcement detention facility and by the dhs is doing enough to ensure that i. C. E. Owned that tension standards are being met. Before we started like to take a moment to acknowledge some of the challenges the subcommittee had in arranging todays hearing we are holding to panel this afternoon because i. C. E. Is declined to sit on the same panel with nakamato the contractor. The departments lack of cooperation makes it more challenging for congress to do its job. They recently stated at a meeting with dhs leaders its important in the subcommittee to bring everyone together pray that is how we can best identify challenges and find ways to solve them. This is important to me as two of i. C. E. So these the otero center and the zabala county Correctional Center detains towards upwards of 1300 migrants from my home district. I visited these facilities. I have concerns about conditions of confinement and im not alone in having these concerns. Dhs on Office Inspector general last year found that these i. C. E. Processes for oversight and compartment are insufficient to stay in compliance with i. C. E. Own standards. It might be that inspectors are set up to fail. For example a contractor which conducts 100 inspections and who va responsible for evaluating compliance of up to 42 standards composed of over 600 elements over the course of just a few days it as a result these missing somed the clear violations of detention standards like a phone not working properly. The oig observed inspectors misreporting the detainees knew how to obtain assistance from i. C. E. Officers when those detainees have indicated the exact opposite. Of additional concerns the fact that even with when these deficiencies are genocide i. C. E. Processes have not ensured ensure that they are corrected. For example i. C. E. Has monitors onsite at several detention facilities to monitor compliance with detention f standards. However the monitors told the oig that when they identified violations they have no means of enforcing corrective action. Instead of pressuring facilities to correct deficiencies from assuring financial penalties for noncompliance in some cases the i. C. E. Grants waiver so facilities dont have to abide by the standards. For example at the oig report from october 2015 to june 2018 i. C. E. Only issued to financial penalties and granted 65 flavors. 63 of which have those waivers had no end date. One of these waivers and in the otero maida street permitted locus individuals with no criminal history to come and go with individuals with more serious criminall records. The standards that typically keeps these detainees separate these detainees separate is an important one that directly impacts the safety of people in detention. Finally i have concerns inspections by i. C. E. Contractors announced far in advance giving a chance for a facility to clean up just before inspection but i i understand te oig made several recommendations to i. C. E. Io to correct these issues and i look forward to hear what steps ice i. C. E. Is taking up whether they are leaving to compliance standards. Also look forward to hearing about the oversight the oig conducts. The oigs oversight work in this space is critical and shining a light on the conditions of confinement. Recent reports have identified serious violations of ice issa standards in an appropriate safetytion on detainee however the scope of oigs inspections is limited by its lack of subject Matter Experts like medical doctors to evaluate the quality of medical care. Im encouraged by the fact that the oig is developing a plan to contract with such experts that can engage in this oversight work and i hope to hear this plan is being put into action. Whwant toon thank the witnesses who are here today and i look forward to your testimony. Nhe chair now recognizes the Ranking Member of the subcommittee the gentleman from texas mr. Crenshaw for an. Pening statement thank you chairwoman tore small and thank thank you to all of her thank you to oliver when is on both panels for being here today. And please were holding this hearing regarding the oversight of i. C. E. Detention facilities. We were able to Work Together to resolve some problems coordinating witnesses and panels to have heavy Key Stakeholders necessary for the productive hearing this issue deserves. It should be noted it is b longstanding practice not to have the agency and the contractors for that agency on the same panel which is why we ended up having two different panels. Im also hopeful the office of civil rights and Civil Liberties will still provide testimony prepared for this hearing even though they were disinvited hope inthis week that i the future 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 them in. The share of the majoritys concern regarding the necessity of enforcing the standards for safety andnd security of i. C. E. Detainees. The health and wellbeing of those obtained in the United States is not a partisan issue. Ive been very public in my praise for theen department of Homeland Security and the individuals who work each day to keep our country safer the men or women of u. S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement are somewhat toughest jobs in the department. I. C. E. Is tasked with enforcing laws and removing individuals who pose a threat to National Security Public Safety or exploit the immigration system. The job is made more difficult when they are publicly and unfairly vilified by public figures. False narrative spread about i. C. E. Are utterly n n reprehene officials primarily targeted for removal by i. C. E. Include convicted criminals gang members repeat violators and those ordered to be removed by an immigration judge. As the flow of immigrants increases the job of i. C. E. Comes were difficult to admit they must devote the resources to the biggest threats over those resources are stretched then. The safe and secure detention of individuals prior to removal from the country is one of the most important duties that i. C. E. Devotes resources too. Although detention is primarily done through contractors the Agency Responsible for these individuals i. C. E. Must ensure that proper care is provided. I. C. E. Must use its Oversight Authority as well as contracting authorities to ensure detention standards are met. I said hires private contractors to do inspections annually. Additionally i. C. E. Has individuals in the number of facilities passed with onsite review of thed daily operations. Although seems like conducting vigorous oversight unfortunately however it seems its frequently the case of Government Agencies with the lack of communication coordination within i. C. E. Raids find her standing i. C. E. Is agreed recommendations of the Inspector Generals office and is working to address these issues. I look forward to hearing from our Witnesses Today on how we can ensure a i. C. E. Detention standards are met and the future and i yield back the balance of my time. In other members of the committees committees are minded under Committee Rules Opening Statements may be submitted for the record. I welcome our first panel of witnesses and thankha them for joining us today. Our first i witness is jenni eakamato president and owner of nakamato inc. Ms. Nakamatos provided ministries support to the federal government in the 1990. Company contracts with i. C. E. To conduct our second witness ms. Katherine hawkins is a Senior Adviser for the constitution project at the project for government oversight her work focuses on National Security immigration and human rights. Prior to her work she served as the National Security fellow for open government. Without objection the witnesses statements will bel answered in the record and i ask each witness to summarize her statement for fiveac minutes beginning with ms. Nakamato. Thank you for your 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. Radar contract has a clause within the contract for a regulation to forbid disclosure these details and we were hesitant to get involved at thehe risk of our contract. The Nakamato Group is a woman on minorityowned Small Business headquartered in Frederick County maryland. My great grandparents immigrated to the United States fromm japa. My maternal grandparents were forward 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. My maternal Family Living in california catcher like which all other property including any businesses that they had. They were given one trashbag to fill a personal items to take with them to leave Everything Else behind. Her family spread out to various internment camps across the country. My maternal grandparents were incarcerated in a japanese internment camp inth arizona. They were there long enough to meet fall in love get married have a baby, my mother and become pregnant again with my aunt. Since they had to start over theyed were offered employment t a Food Processing factory before they were released and chose to move to a small town in southern new jersey were ultimately i was born. My father was born and raised in hawaii. My five grandfather returned to japan soon after his born. My father was youngest of large broken home and raised by several of his older brothers. My father served for more than 20 years inve the 90s dates army and served two tours during vietnam and served on one of the first all japanese American Green beret units. Upon his retirement he be relocated to frederick where i grew up because my parents did not have a m lot of money i word during high school and have been working since i was 15 years old surely after high school i was able to obtain the secretarial job with the government at the department of health and Human Services but i worked there for over six years before leaving to work for three successful minorityowned contracting firms. I decided to take a chance and start my own company. I started this company in 2003 that is the same same era lost my late husband to suicide. I still volunteer for his paternal order of police and have volunteered for them for over 20 years serving as the executive assistant to the executive board. The Nakamato Group of certified as a Small Business Administration Program in 2004. I successfully graduated certification in 2017. The first contract awarded to my company was in 2004 to maintain a hotline entitled insure kids now which is a hotline that provides free or lowcost health care to kids through Health Insurance programs which in the United States we still maintain a contract after 15y, years and it now includes another hotline entitled 311 baby which helps expectant and new mothers providing information. For the last 15 years we have obtained logistics contracts for the food and Drug Administration and the department of health and Human Servicess. From 2006 to 2007 with a contract with the foodh and Drug Administration to help them hire hispanics to increase diversity within their workforce. We continue to provide Logistic Support for Advisory Committees. Our most current and longstanding logistics contract has been with the rental logistics for the Advisory Committee for health and Human Services and we provided logistics for several other policy meetings regarding telehealth and Rural America from 2010 to 2013. In 2005 obtained a contract with the now dissolved office of the federal detention trustee which was the department under the department of justice. We have won a place with a blanket Purchase Agreement to provide detention Expert Support Service tort the office of the federal detention trustee producing performance based standards we provided expert Specialized Services for consultation by conducting a silly reviews of noncontract jaylen deterrents in jails which housed Immigration Enforcement detainees. In 2007 we were asked to attend the meeting at i. C. E. Headquarters where we are asked to perform onsite honor during services and provide monthly Technical Assistance that included fulltime monitors for 40 of the largest i. C. E. Detention facilities and monthly quarterly biannual reviews of b other small i. C. E. Detention facilities. The goal was to ensure the facilities were in compliance with standards. I. C. E. Piggybacked on that existing contract we had at the time of the department of justice and we did this type of work or are them from 2007 to 2010. Ms. Nakamato your time is up if you want to include a few seconds of concluding remarks. Or the rest can be entered into the record. Okay. Chairwoman for a small Ranking Member crunch on members of the subcommittee thank you for the o opportunity to testify today. I miss senior legal analyst for the constitution project on government oversight. Its a nonpartisan watchdog investigates government abuses of power. My colleagues and i have done a series of investigations in i. C. E. Detention. We found evidence with inadequate medical care and Adequate Mental Health care and overuse of solitary confinement. These are chronic problems that they have grown worse since i. C. E. Is detained more and more people. I. C. E. Detentionon centers are subject to various forms off oversight the dhs. Their annual inspections by the Nakamato Group onsite mungin expections by different offices within i. C. E. In the dh Inspector General and Civil Liberties. This sounds like a lot of inspections. The system is failing to ensure compliance with detention standards. The nakamato inspections occur most often are the only ones that contribute to the contract they often fail to uncover serious violations. Other inspections are more thorough and they often remain hidden from congress and the public and i. C. E. Fails to make changes they recommended and this is a result inhumane conditions can exist for years. In somehe cases the violation gs to the zoo level of deliberate to illustrate the problems ive described my findings on three of the largest detention facilities. In september of 20 teen the Inspector General reported on an inspection of the Adelanto Detention Center and talk to you. They found sheets made into nooses and 15 south inadequate medical care and overuse of solitary confinement. The Nakamato Group conducted its previously announced inspection of adelanto. They found not only adelanto was in compliance with i. C. E. Detention standards but accuse the Inspector General of riding erroneous and inflammatory reports. They dismissed the nooses of the House Keeping detainees. The recently uncovered a third investigation of adelanto by the office of civil rights and Civil Liberties rcr cl. See our cl visited adelanto in 2015 in november of 2017. In 2015 the sheriff 2 warned i. C. E. That the leadership was not competent. In 2017 they found no evidence that corrections were made to address this issue priebus led to in their words and adequate detainee medical care that resulted a medical injury including deformities in detainee deaths. They found mentally ill detainees are being placed in solitary confinement instead of being treated sometimes for shockingly long times. Sometimes it has fatal consequences. As the district who committed suicide at the stuart Detention Center may 2017 and july 2018. Instead of receiving psychiatric treatment both were placed in solitary confinement for weeks. Upon themselves and their isolation cells. Despite the to death nakamato inspectors found stewart was in compliance with all 39 of i. C. E. Detention standards and 2017 and 2018. Inadequate medical care led to another death of the Detention Center in aurora california that colorado. For two weeks of symptoms grew worse with medical staff believing he was was faking arts art said during them even when he became too weak to set up. There were many other credible reports of medical cases including a case whereg a detainee with untreated bedsores became so severely infected that is likely to be amputated. The Nakamato Group inspectors found theyth were in compliance with 41 of 41 standards involving 2015 in 2018. Let me close with oversight of i. C. E. Detention. Number one congress should require dhs to impose financial sconsequences for violations of detention standards do matter which type of inspection uncovers them. Number two and 2017 dhs present a policy limited detention of individuals known to be suffering from mental goal mental or physical unless disabled elderly orld pregnant which detention is not otherwise in the public interest. Number three congress should place restrictions on dhss ability to transfer once in order to expand attention. Number four congress should strengthen the authority and transparency of the office of civil rights and Civil Liberties. Thank you verye much. Im happy to take any questions. I think all the witnesses for their testimony. I remind each member that he or she will have five minutes to question the panel and that i now recognize myself for questions. Ms. Nakamato thank you for being here today and i understand your concern about about the contract for your i. C. E. Contract does not prohibit you from testifying at a congressional hearing, correct . Correct. But this is public. Thank you. As i i noted in my Opening Statement you are responsible, nakamato inspectors are responsible for viewing 600 standards in a few days to the oig is not the only reason the first entity to raise concerns about the process bring back more than three years ago the Home Security Advisory Counsel recommended i. C. E. Move away from abroad checklist for rinspections. Ms. Nakamato does i. C. E. Late to conduct thorough inspections . They do. They have to not only go through a checklist, they have to know the standards. They have to know the actual information within the standards within the components within those standards. 600 elements in three days you have enough time to get that done. Yes. You have enough inspectors . Yes. And you dont need a narrower scope to make sure you are verifying all of those items . No. The three days on cider to perform and review detainees s staff and to see the facility itself. The rest of our report writing or putting it all that together happens after we leave. Havent explained the report in the oig report that for example the phone wasnt working they neglected to check and see if theres a phone and if the phone directed them or give them ability to make a complaint . I dont know, i dont have the oig report memorized but i know that my staff checked into it. What about documentation being reported is complete without checking the file . My staff checks files according to the standards. Im not disputing it. Im telling you that my staff know what they have to look out within the standardst. What about cdl license is being reported as existing without confirming the documentation . I dont agree with that. My staff always checks. The credentials that are required within the standards our eyes checked by the staff. The oig was incorrect in making that observation. I believe, i guess if they said we didnt been. What about only in interviewing detainees who speak english or using a guard to interpret in spanish who is in charge of guarding the facility . I think there are different ways to find out information of what is going on at the facility and some of the interview process is informal and some of it is formalized. Since the oig report came out we have since formalized the interview process as they suggested. Have you formalized the process to make sure you have enough spanishspeaking inspectors . We haveor a spanish line that where able to use it in the facility. In terms of certifying that they do speak spanish to you have a system for that . I dont understand what youre asking. You dont have a system for establishing if an inspector does speak spanish . If they are claiming to . We have a quarter of our staff that speaks spanish. If they speak spanish have you confirm it . Nmap the ask the detainees questions in spanish. Do you speak spanish . I do not. Can youou determine there usg correct language . Just quickly to move on i. C. E. Has concurred with the oigs recommendations for redefining the scope of work. Why hasnt nakamato . Concurred with those recommendations . Revise the statement of where . So you have more time or are more targeted in evaluating those elements. We have been doing this for a long time. We do thiswe for other agencies. The same amount of time is onsite. We have never said that we needed more time. Thank you. I will recognize my colleague mr. Crenshaw from texas. Thank you cherlin. Im going to follow it that line of questioning about the more time issue because it seems from our perspective nakamato inspectors said to believe the Inspector General that there is more time required. Is that not what you have heard . That there is more time . More time for inspections or to meet the criteria for all of the bull point that you have to hit. My staff is not complained about the amount of time that they have. They have three days on site. They havent complained to you specifically about it . From other reports they have said that. So its at least something to think about or at least get feedback from your own staff i believe because there does seem to be quite a few requirements that perhaps theres not enough time to look into. And if that is the case than restructuring the requirements is certainly in line. For d days or three days is nota huge stretch of imagination the imagination and something we cac easilyan do. So, aside from the time difference to your employees and do your inspectors to you with any other issues regarding the inspection process . Suzie clear enough and youve establish you dont have enough time but as anything else . We were very closely with i. C. E. Or 19 works very closely with i. C. E. If they are in issues that come up we have a Good Relationship with leading i. C. E. Know what the issues are. What about the oig report . Generally speaking you think the report is valid and like you said you dont have that in front of you but generally speaking what issue do you agree with or disagree up in that report . I think that what they see a the time that they are there or would they looked at could be different from what we are looking at. We are looking out things from a different perspective because our team knows what to look for when they go on site soap based off of whatever they are seeing, based off of their past experience our team has over 35 Years Experience in management so they know kind of what they are looking at when they walk into a room. Ms. Hawkins you said some things that were very shocking to for instance the nooses. You said you found nooses which Nakamato Group did not find. Can you expand on that . How many nooses are we talking about or what is the implication there . Sure. This is a clarification in that oig reports findings. Do you know how many nooses we are talking about . 15 of 20 and i do think they make you proceeded to connect that to suicide. The amplification is that there is almost a factory line of nooses being created for suicide which is probably not the case. That was the implication in yout statement. My statement was brief but if you look at the report my organization did would it be logical to think that the sheets were being braided for the reasons the Nakamato Group claimed they were which was privacy within their cells . Is that possible . Would it be important toll clary ehat when we Say Something like there were a bunch of nooses found in thehe facility . Is a pretty important clarification. My organization said and the Inspector General g said that ty were primarily used for privacy. Its important clarification because the stuff gets really out ofhe hand. You also mention some suicides which were absolutely terrible. Reconnecting, where the deficiencies that were not caught by the inspectors that were directly connected to those incidents . E. I think roenicke understanding of medical care and Mental Health care. According to i. C. E. Standards are according to your standards . According to i. C. E. Standards. Can you go into more detail on exactly what we are talking about . I will refer you to the detainees death review which became public recently. I dont know theo detainees deh review for the other detainees in suicides that stewart is publicly available. I would encourage the committee to request a copy of that to get details on thatt. Okay. Thank you. The chair rep recognizes for five minutes the german from new jersey ms. Hawkins. Thank you chair and thank you for being here in your testimony. Ms. Nakamato how many employees do you have that are inspectors . Could you put your microphone on please . We have 45 parttime employees and 12 fulltime employees. How many facilities do have a contract shall relationship with i. C. E. To do whatever it is im going to ask you that you do . How many facilities . Our contract is with i. C. E. How many facilities . As many as they ask us to inspect. Did you have any limit in your contracts. You are contracted to do 50 of the foreigner facilities. We inspect at least 120 a year. Of facilities . Of facilities. 45 parttime inspectors and 12 lfulltime . And what are the credentials that and the experience that they are supposed to have . With honor statement of work that declares with the credentials have to be. Im asking you what do they have to be . They have to have 10 Years Experience in a correctional setting. They have to be we have wardens. We have superintendents. Do they actually do the inspections or are there other inspections that are done in . They actually do the inspections. What is this threeday limitation . Is this something that the contract calls for . This is something you all decided was a best practice . Yes within the contract. The contract. We have a similar contract with the department of justice and its the same thing. When does your contract run out with i. C. E. . I believe march. What is the value of your contract . I dont have that in front of me. What you estimated to be about . Food you have who is with you from your staff . My Vice President and my chief Financial Officer. And your chief Financial Officer is able to whisper in your ear with the value of the contract is. 3 million. Thats a lot of money. Ms. Hawkins, some, first of all you are only testifying about the oig report. Nothing that you or your organization have for yourself, right . One of my colleagues have gone too adelanto but my reporting relies mainly on government documents and a whole lot of phonerv interviews. In the facilities that you mentioned with inAdequate Mental Health services, inadequate other Health Care Services and adequate food, and inadequate something else. I dont remember the something else. Are any of those facilities that the Nakamato Group had the contractor inspect . Yes. They are some a of i. C. E. s largest facilities i think they are inspect it onis an annual basis. Okay. Ms. Nakamato in 2009 i. C. E. Frequently failed inspections and appropriations including concluded d. A. Just from contracts. The two most recent performance ratings were less than adequate. In the last five years are you aware of any of the over 72 hour facilities that have received an overall final rating of less than two, adequate . Less than adequate . Did your inspections are you asking im asking you if you have knowledge of any of these facilities, any facilities that you all are responsible for inspecting that have received an overall final rating of less than adequate . T yes. How many . Six this year alone. And what did you do with those findings . We put them in the report and submitted it to i. C. E. And what has happened in those facilities . One that i know off the top of my head have a followon that we went back after they established a corrective action plan and our team goes back and after so many days and we have to go in and inspect it again. Let me press you real quick. I have 19 seconds. Im 20 over. Im sorry. Thank you so much. Thank you, yield back. The chair recognizes for five minutes the gentleman the gentlewoman from nevada ms. Titus. Thank you. I will yield some time to ms. Watson coleman so she can finish. Thank you my colleague or they t just wanted to know if ay of these facilities were facilities that had two ratings to sequential ratings less than adequate . And if so are they not supposed to lose their ability to serve youris capacity and to knowledge have any of them . Thats my question. Thank you. I dont know. I can get that information submitted for the record. I dont have that information in front of me. Thanknk you. Reclaiming my time. Thank you. Ms. Hawkins or organization released a report on the increased use of solitary confinement orr segregation by i. C. E. At according to the report the henderson Detention Center which was in Southern Nevada was among the top 15. They used segregation 121 unique times and unique placements in 16 of thosese placements lasted more than 75 days. I wonder if you could explain what i. C. E. Detention standards tate regarding the use of segregation and if you are aware of any waivers that were granted by i. C. E. For compliance with standards . Thank you for your question. I can probably speak more generally to i. C. E. s waiver process and segregation standards than specifically with regard to theil hendersonville facility. In general in 2013, i. C. E. Direct did that facilities reform their practice on segregation, improve reporting on when vulnerable detainees are placed in segregation or anyone is placed for a long period and try to use it only as a last resort. They also recommended that facilities try, when they detainees held in administrative segregation protective custody or for Health Reasons or other reasons that are not punishment for disciplinary that they should receive the same privileges that detainees in the general population received which wouldh mean they dont spend 23 hours locked in their cell. We have found speaking to former i. C. E. Officials and inspectors and others but that exception, that has not been implemented. Those facilities say that its just not practical for them to give people privileges in administrative segregation and most i. C. E. Facilities are jailed. County jails, you know they continue to have segregation meet in solitary. That provision is inadequately implemented. They grant away for . Are there any standards for granting waivers . I dont know, i think i would need to examine the more detailed inspection on the solitary i dont know i know on dhs web site theres a list of waivers and i dont know if its one of those or if its just a general practice words found to be technically compliant with the standards because the detention standards tend to have flexibility in their language. Is this something ms. Nakamato you would check when your inspectors go out at use of solitary confinement . We do. There are standards, with an i. C. E. Standard bearer standard thater are for segregation. Our staff goes through and insurers that the standards are within compliance. Dont you find those numbers kind of high . 121 placement and 16 for more than 755 days . Over just a year and a half . Segregation in solitary confinement are not the same. How about explaining to me what theff differences. Segregation, barrett different variances of segregation. It can be for disciplinary. It can be for administrators. There are different types and then within those types there are different components within the standard. It doesnt seem to me you know very much about this business. My time is up. I would appreciate it ifol folks would stay if they have other questions. I want want to followup follow up on announced versus unannounced visits. Ms. Nakamato and you conduct inspections for i. C. E. How much noticed is a facility get it . I believe 30 days. Ms. Hawkins went conduct an inspection of the detention facility is it better to announce the visit ahead of time or conduct the visit unannounced 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 arrived. One caveat to that, i know the office of the Inspector General conducts unannounced inspections that had been very valuable and bringing poor conditions to light. The office of civil rights and Civil Liberties does tend to announce their inspections further in advance that they do so in part because they bring independent experts along and part of why they announced the inspection is to request medical files be pulled for the medical inspector to do interviews to make sure they are able to speak with a clinicall staff. They are doing a really indepth look making many fewer inspections than nakamato does so there can be a place for inspections announced an advanced but its going to be a quick check to check the cleanliness of the cells and things of that nature. Much better to be unannounced. Smit think you miss hawkins. Staff visited Detention Centers in mississippi. Prior to their arrival walls were painted new put up and flower beds were placeded outsi. Do you think its wise to give facilities advanced notice when conducting these inspections ms. Nakamato . Currently we have another contract with the u. S. Marshals service where we dont. Announc. Do you think thats better . We just do what the contract says, unannounced visits or unannounced inspections in this contract does unannounced inspections. I. C. E. Does what it says in our contract. They announce given your experience inspecting facilities do you find that you more regularly determine the true conditions of a facility if youar are unannounced . I think so. Thank you. I will yield the rest of my time and i recognize the gentleman from texas for five minutes, mr. Crenshaw. Thank you madam chairwoman. Ms. Nakamato heavy upper recommended a facility no longer be utilized by i. C. E. Or made a specific recommendation about must what must be improved of those facility . And is 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 of components with within the standards met the standard. To answer ms. Titus question i believe, none of the failed inspections, we have never had that but we have had for all of the detainees were removed after failed inspection. We recommend on all of our report with the final recommendation is based on howeverer many components they have matter did not meet. What were some of the more serious examples that you would cite . Its appropriate to understand. Life safety issues, medical m issues. And food. Those are the major things. Theres a life safety issue then what would be a good example of a life safety issue . I dont know thew standards y heart. There are certain rules within the life state the issue in the life safety standards. Like for example fire drills. They are supposed to do fire drills a certain way, a certain time in a certain way throughout the year. Thats just like ann example of one of the things. The reason i asked for samples is important to realize when you say life safety that could mean something very extreme. He said fire drills and its less extreme. Im trying to get a handle on it if you dont have any, we dont have any. One of the main problems it seems and one of the reasons there was a report in the first place is because the office of detention and oversight finds additional deficiencies in the same facilities that Nakamato Group did not end in even much broader scope than they do. Is that the right way to do things . It the scope be similar . Is it better because theres overlap . What is your general take on the scope of inspections for the Nakamato Group . Comparing our inspection compared to their inspection its my understanding that their inspection is more targeted based off of something, the report says they dont meet the standards then they send their team and. The differencee is that they are sendingg in more people to inspect for less standards and less components because its a targeted inspection. I see. Did that make your job more difficult when you have a much broader scope . I dont think it makes our job difficult. We have access to those reports. If there is pennon odl inspection that the facility we are going do we get the report so we can see whatever findings they found to make sure. I guess the question is abt thoroughness. If your scope is so much more broad than odls is their lack of depth within the inspection that is subsequent to that scope . For our scope of work it talks to the whole amount of standards, all of the i. C. E. Detention standards. Theyds created all of the standards of mail must be reviewed annually. The targeted inspections are just that, targeted so they are only looking at certain youre saying, you are comparing apples and oranges to an extent. Thank you. I yield the rest of my time. Thank you. The chair now recognizes for five minutes the gentleman from the gentlewoman from new jersey. Thank you. Ms. Nakamato your inspections are annual and you were there for three days . Do you go like clockwork . Is it ark year from the time you went t you for and you anticipae when you work coming. You dont tell them when youre coming. We receive a schedule from i. C. E. Can you tell us the other federal agencies you have a similar contract with for which you do inspections without notifying people in advance . What are the agency do you have a contract with . The u. S. Marshals service. That see it . That the only other one . Yes. In december 2018 and a letter to members of the senate you disputed some of oigs reporting. Inor fact the letter proposed te inspection of the adelanto facility in direct response to the oig findings. You allege the oig findings in the adelanto facility regarding hanging nooses or whatever you want to call them an inadequate dental care was inaccurate and an embarrassment to their office and i. C. E. As a part of your contract with i. C. E. To refute findings that the oig or other groups find in their inspections ofon facilitis and thats a yes or no. No. You also said you are better report only includes that which was verified while we werent sites notwithstanding any changes that may have occurred before or after the inspection. Your inspectors at adelanto in october of 2018, how could you dispute that was observed by the oig five months earlier . For example you claim the oig was wrongly noting that a detainee in a wheelchair had not inft his wheelchair. Since his recent arrival and is not used any of the Hygiene Products in the bag given to him but your inspectors were present so how could you possibly claim that the oigs findings were not true . Because my staff went back and looked at the actual record. Did you see the man sitting in a a wheelchair or have even moved . Five months later maam. Finally your letter says dhs i. C. E. Detention program is dedicated significant resources to ensure the proper care of detainees in compliance with tho standards. You think it is appropriate for your company to make that kind of a statement that suggest i. C. E. Is doing everything properly even though i know you are a beneficiary of their resources . Do you believe that is a reasonable position for you to take . A yes or a no. I take your silence as a yes or a no. Ms. Hawkins are you familiar with this the nakamato letter . Yes. You have a position on whether not raise concerns of it did strike me as strange to see criticism of a previous inspection in the nakamato inspection but i looked into this event when i wrote an article on i. C. E. Inspections published earlier thisbl year ad one of the criticisms that nakamato made of the oig inspections were that oig didnt have people with experience in detention or corrections when i asked what people said its true. Pl it is possible that oig got certain details wrong or misunderstood things. Thats why it was so striking to see theirir reports from the office of civil rights and Civil Liberties from the oig report and the subsequent nakamato report and if anything they were more critical than the oig was. Thank you for your f testimo. Im now going to welcome her second panel of witnesses and thank you for joining us today. Our first witness is my miss diana shaw assistant Inspector General for special reviews and evaluations. It is dhs office of Inspector General prepper deserving this role ms. Shaw served okay. I apologize. We will wait until you are seated. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] thank you so much. I apologize. I now welcome our second panel of witnesses and thank you for joining today. Their first witness is ms. Diana shaw Inspector General for special reviews and evaluation that the dhs office of Inspector General. Preserving this role ms. Shaw served in several leadership positions within the oig including aig for Legal Affairs acting counsel to the ig director of the review group and acting aig for external affairs. Our second witness mr. Tae johnson is the assistant director for custody management enforcement and removal operations at i. C. E. Mr. Johnson began his career with former immigration and Naturalization Service in 1992. Since transferring to i. C. E. Headquarters in 2070 is served in a number of leadership roles includingnc chief of staff for e office of detention policy. Without objection the witnesses it will be inserted into the record that i now ask each witness to summarize his or her statements for five minutes beginning with ms. Shaw. Chairwoman torres small thank you for inviting me to discuss oversight of i. C. E. Detention facilities. I. C. E. Is responsible orde visiting a Cancer Detection of tens of thousands of removable aliens. For the summer i. C. E. And a pot may 64000 at the height of proximally 200 detention facilities nationwide to. These facilities are governed by standards that aim to establish consistent conditions of confinement in the i. C. E. Detention system. In an effort to ensurean compliance of the standards i. C. E. Developed a multilayered approach to detention oversight which includes a combination of onsite monitoring and inspections performed by i. C. E. Or so now and contracted service providers. These oversight activities have resulted in the identification and correction of numerous instances of noncompliance of detention standards. However the volume of new and repeatie deficiencies identified to the oig independent inspections raises questions about the overall acceptance of i. C. E. Multilayered approach. Since fiscal year 2015 the oig has been conducting unannounced inspections of i. C. E. Facilities. These inspections have identified a range of deficiencies including unreported security incidents, dangerous mishandling of food, dilapidated physical conditions and unaddressed security risks. 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 att inspectorsem observed braided ad shes referred to as missus by staff and detainees. In 15 of the 20 cells we visited. Serious issues r like these raie questions about the effectiveness about the multilayer approach. They need to review the entities involved in the oversight of each layer. Private Company Average is contracted and we expect holding icy detainees. Its time of our review, they were inspecting about 100 facilities per year. To evaluate compliance 39 to 42 detention standards. The oversight or odl, provides another layer of oversight. At the time of our review, audio was inspecting approximately 30 facilities a year. Fifteen to 16 core standards. The i stations dsm, onsite select facilities, to continuously monitor compliance standards. The oig work revealed shortcomings of each layer of the system. For instance, the inspection of outline and isis contract, as much to broad to these inspections. As a result the inspections do not always fully examine actuali conditions of the facilities. Or identifiedpe all complies deficiencies. In contrast, audio inspections are narrower in scope and use to inspect. They are relatively infrequent making it difficult for zero do to make sure everything is being addressed. Finally, while the dsm isut providing i onsite facility monitoring, frequently are looking to speak to actions. If all to field offices which some are resistance to working with the dsm. Two invoke necessary changes. The challenges identified in each layer oversight system, is less effective than it otherwise could be. Meanwhile, i. C. E. Continues to send millions of dollars in detentionn oversight, that went out achieving comprehensive itconsistent compliance. I. C. E. Can and should be doing more. Princes, i. C. E. Does not fully utilize tools available to it to try compliance among its contractors. A recent review of i. C. E. This management of detention contracts, found that i. C. E. Is failing to use Quality Assurance tools and impose consequences for contract noncompliance. Moreover, we found that instead of Holding Facilities accountable through available financial accounts, i. C. E. Frequently issued waivers to deficientqu facilities. Exempting them from having to comply with the dip dungeon standards. Until i. C. E. Fully implements corrective actions, the oversight will not be as effective as it needs to be. This concludes my testimony and im happy to answer any questions the committee may have. Thank you. I now recognize mr. Johnson for five minutes. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today regarding ices oversight over the detentions facilities. Ices facility removal up operations, oversees the basins, immigration Detention Centers, seasoning, one of the most highly diverse populations of any detention correctional system in the world. Detainees placed in i. C. E. Custody, represent virtually every nation on earth and various security classifications and threat levels and often arrived in the custody with complexx medical and complex detention needs. Health safety and general welfare, is taken very serious. Continually evaluate and approve the care of detainees. Through a robust Inspections Program, the agency ensures detention facilities use so in accordance with i. C. E. National detention standards. These are often more rigorous than those that apply to other detained populations. These standards were propagated in the cooperation with i. C. E. Takeovers, the American Correctional Association and representatives of don governmental organizations to ensure that all individuals that i. C. E. Because these, are treated with dignity and respect and provide care. I. C. E. Uses three sets of detents of standards for the adult population. The national Detention Centers and therd s2000, based National Detention standards in 2008 as well as the 2011 standards. The standards specify the Living Conditions appropriate for detainees, and help to ensure safe and secure environment and covers such areas as medical care foodservice, environMental Health and safety, segregation, the use of legal and religious services, as well as visitation. Ices requirements exceeded district standards which is evident from large number of local jails who are unwilling to meet ices more rigorous requirement and have been elected to detain a population. It was recently revised in 2016 to include important updates standards on Disability Identification assessment and accommodations as well as medical care for women. To ensure ices detention facilities meet the requisite standards, they provide oversight through multiplayer inspection and monitoring program. I. C. E. Conducts annual and bio renewal inspections of all facilities over a certain population and utilizes the self inspection process with the small populations or those in house detainees for on 72 hours. Additionally nice Office Oversight the dhs cr l they often have open access to i. C. E. Detention facilities. Theyve also enlisted the service of the nokia motive to have inspections around the country. Annual inspections, special reviews as ordered by i. C. E. , using the applicable engine standards. Contractors inspectors typically spend three days on each facility. And in addition to an environMental Health and safety subject mattero a expert, they o employ the services of the Health Professional and detainee rights. When deficiencies are found, or on any dive boat inspection, the work with field offices to ensure timely and corrective actions are done. I. C. E. Greatly appreciates the work conducted by the oig regarding the inspection process. And carefully evaluates hisis recommendations. The june 26th, 2018 report entitled ices inspections and monitoring of detention facilities do not lead to sustained compliance. The ig, fiber recommendations that which i. C. E. Could card. Which have been used a to implement and improve our inspections process. In response to oig his findings, isis reevaluated the existing inspection scope and methodology in the statement of work for its inspections contract to ensure inspections procedures are adequately and appropriately resourced, to fully evaluate detention conditions. Ices also created a Quality Assurance team consisting of seasoned federal employees tote perform Quality Assurance reviews of ices contract inspections during each annual inspection. Ices also developing followup inspections processes for select facilities where egregious or numerous deficiencies are identified. Updating and enhancing current procedures to ensure verification of all corrective actions, including better tracking of all corrective actions by facility and responsible field office. As well as developing protocols for er zero offices to require facilities to implement former correction active plans resulting from deficienciess identified. I. C. E. Understands. Your time is expired. Complete the sentence. Sure, thank you for the opportunity to testify today regarding this important matter. I look forward to answering any questions youou have. All of the witness for the testimony, remind each member that he or she will have five minutes to question the manual. An act or recognize myself or questions. If it talking a lot about the 600 elements. And the scope of work e and it list this process for lack. It has a much more narrow scope of inspection andt allows them o deeply assess the health and safety of detainees. His recommendations for i. C. E. Is to revise the inspection scope and methodology for contract inspectors within the eye systems ofor work. Michelle, do you believe that it keeps its contractors from fully complying with its oversight responsibilitiesorpr . So based on our observations, related to that report, we found that it was an incredibly challenging goal that had been set for the inspectors to try to review the full scope of the 39 to 42 applicable standards in a three day period with 45 person team is the tall order. Based on our experience and highly trained staff, i think they felt to would have struggles to try to meet those goals. So the statement oftr work and e breath of the statement of work makes it very difficult to get any sort of a deep dive into some of these issues. Should i. C. E. Revise the statement works to ensure quality inspections to assess compliance with detention standards. You can just say yes,. Yes thats our recommendation. I. C. E. Any plans to amend the statement the satisfies recommendations customer. It continues to be open and treated resolved, meaning we are continue to with i. C. E. On the corrective action. Weve seen in rations. Possible ways that they might revise the scope but nothing definitivef has been decided at this. Based on our most recent updates, because they are putting out requests for proposals on that contract, i think that will potentially slow down the process slightly that we would continue to suggest that regardless of their contractors, and he to revise statement of work to ensure that they are getting detail findings. You say it was sold in the process, you mean the rsvp would go out and they might not change the scope ofay work that i get a neww contract. Im speaking based on ourht understanding of what weve been hearing for mice. The update that we received is that they were putting in a request for proposal they had not provided a new update on th status of the revisions to the statement of work. To act as a concern o you. I think just based on the little bit that i know about how contracts are done, i think it is important to have a clearly defined statement of s work. At least in mind when you are going to the process. Student thanknk you. Mr. Johnson, what is the status of the plans identified from a shop. Michelle stated we are in a middle every compete, the plan to increase or make the need it improvements in our statement om work have been drafted. When a new competition we expect to do more work within the next three months. Will you commit to finishing revising the scope of work before finishing your ft process . Yes, new requirements will be made in this new contract. Michelle wright complaining in a followup work to evaluate both of or not the inspections have been improvedro . We currently dont have plan to work in thator area. But it is the case that is part of our recommendation followup process. We are consistently obtaining updates from i. C. E. Based on how well theyre implementing the corrective action plan so move and expect to get some updates through that process. We will continue our unannounced Inspections Program next year. And we will visit facilities many of which will have been reviewed marking moto and give us another another opportunity. F as part ofop our pre inspection to scoping work. We do look at what doctor mona has had to evaluate both of we are seeing corrections when we are on site. I just want bring up the issue of penalties versus waivers. In two halft years, ices issued only to financialal penalties. They offer 65y waivers including allowing the use of pepper spray that is ten more times toxic and pepper straight spirits strip searches. Amanda strike permitting the commonow billing of detainees wh varying criminal histories. Mr. Johnson was appointed standards if i simply uses waivers to sanction a noncompliance. So i think first, its i important to note that the only provisions that ices ever issued waivers on are things that are certainly not of health. But does not affect the health and safety. Classification is really important for housing, and for recreation. My apologies i am out of time. Thank you. And i recognize the wrecking member and the gentleman from texas. Will just continue your answer, mr. Johnson. So historically, classification is generally sort of help for housing as well as recreation. Those are the areas where detainees and makes generally are most vulnerable. In your specific and since the only waiver of sort of a classification requirement had to do with both of an individual was going from there housing unit or the medical area need it to be escorted by an officer during the events that the standards required. So thats an area that we have sort of waved in the past because in sort of cuts against the whole idea of civil detention to escort loophole three. Should really be based on i the threat of the particular detainee. As opposed to the fact that he may have had a marital dispute with his wife and thats why the individual is classified as a level three. So i really think you have to look at the specific circumstances of the waiver before you can just sort of conclude that that ices waiver has somehow made an individual unsafe or vulnerable because we would never. So that example, its honestly the case and violent criminal was put in a cell with a nonviolent periods to me that is correct correct, classification and housing is what would always wait be. Other circumstances to the w other waivers. There are number of waivers, a lot of the waivers that we have granted are four things that are sort of written in our standards 20 years ago that are no longer bound detention practices. Most popular waiver that we grant has to do with the barbershop provision which requires that the barbershop began a dedicated area facility that the barbershop has i met specifically with the gentleman alluded to, is an additional explanation that would explain those particular waivers that you mention pepper spray and. Im not perfect familiar with the pepper spray waiver. Discussion of scope. Talks about is it too much scope for the contractors. There is very narrow scope for the audio, is the recommendation to do like the zero d0 or is there some middle ground recommended by the ide. Higher frequency of inspection waspe recommended. Maintain of the scope that they used. Correct. That should be used for michael noto as well . We left it to i. C. E. According to what they felt they would be able to achieve in their standard. What is ices position on that mr. Johnson. Our position is that we have 39 or 42 standards depending on which version of theds standards are applicable. Differentiate between the standards. The more robust standards, which are generally applicable and are dedicated facilities or facilities that house only for the mosthe part are merely neary i. C. E. A can detainees are neary tailored to those facilities. We have our lower version of standards which are the detentions standards which are generally for our local jails where we have shared s populatis and in many instances the relative with a small i. C. E. Population with the overall large population. Is there any benefit to the contractors with rodeos to ensure i guess, for consistency and inspections. For my perspective no. We are getting exactly what we expect out of our inspections we have to inspect against all of the requirements have to develop that checklist to identify what we believe. 54000 detainees, to what extent is that having increased pressure on these operations in these facilities. We have to activate many newi facilities. Many of them have never seen eyes facilities. Its a huge learning clerk to sort of figure out and learn what the inspections required. I am sure for some of those folks, it was a little challenging at times. So it didnt affect the operations. Thank you. [background sounds] thank you mr. Johnson and ms. Mr. Johnson, how many that oversee the work with these facilities that have detainees. I have about 200 or so direct reportspo and folks that actualy focus on detention. Probably about half of those, hundred or hundred and 20. The map hundred what . One hundred to 120. Detention operations. How many facilities are you responsible for and showing that the standards of care are appropriate . About 250 his facilities. Zero one who inspection people, how did they determine which facility they do, the smaller facilities . They inspect all of the facilities that we use that house people for over 72 hours. I have detentions on site Detention Service management that is our largest facilities and the cover about 50 facilities and reach about 70 percent of our population. He told me there are 250 altogether . Thats correct. Of those, have had occasion tot. Close any for deficiency ad service unsafe conditions. We have close several facilities. How many. Over the last ten years, i would say,. Tell me about the last three years. Three years, i dont recall offhand how many we have shut down. Not kimonos will provide a report of their findings right. Right. Those recommendations to your department. That is correct. Circumstancesny deep with you organ our findings. Generally no. Know are generally no. I recall one instance where we disagreed with one particular one and we went back to them and explain our position. So there is a mention in my briefing here, that there was an instance where i. C. E. Recommendations they came from them came for an extended period of time, over 100 days. Is that some or come to your recollection . Vaguely i do remember a statement that i needs a suggestion that there wasns an inspection that was sort of sitting in a draft status or an extended period of time. What is the amount of time that the recommendations stand waiting for a response from yall . Do you have a requirement. Met. There is no requirement. Wee try to get those reports finalize sooner rather than later but there couldve been ab technical issue. So what is the followup. In telling a facility that has x number of violations and that they have to clean them out. What is thero process for followup . Was a report is finalized, uniform corrective action plan is generated, it is sent to the field office in the facility. Its for any serious live safety issues, they are required to come up with a corrective action plan in short order i think it is a week, maybe two weeks. For any sort of regular. My question is we do have these efficiencies, and they are brought to your attention that he told the facility that you have x number of days or whatever to correct it. What is your followup . Sonar dsm staff facilities what we actually have w onsite staff, we have prisons there and we can ensure the things that they said that they were going to do are in fact done. How many facilities have e onsite staff. Fifty. Are they fulltime in that one facility. Fulltime folks that has been the overwhelming majority of the time, and they could have another facility close by that they have to provide overlooked. In the last couple of years, have you used your financial fallacies to get a facility to do what you need it them to do. We have. Stomach how many more than two. I heard earlier that that had occurred only twice. Its at least been ten to 15 that i am aware of that we could get you an exact number. Do you want a second round and you said it wasnt necessary. Im going to indulge myself inwa minute. Im not quite sure why we are having all of this consternation about inspections of a facilities meeting standards and standards are relevant. Both of or not the scope of the standards are doable and make sense and why we dont have the kind of followup. We are supposed to have present my question to you this shot, is do we need extra people. Or do we need then lining of operations or do wein need bettr commitment. I think based on our recommendations, primary issue that we have is really a process on. Ensuring that there is adequatee followup. That there is documentation to support flames by the facilities that they been fomented correction. The need of more robust process for ensuring followup. Does that mean you need for staff sir . I like to have more staff at our largerff facilities. To make sure that we have that onsite presence and that monitor conditions each day. So certainly the staff would be we will. My last question. How you do Quality Control checking up your contract. What i would say is ten years ago, the government used to inspect its own facilities. But after a lot of criticism about. What you do to assure that they are doing their job and you contracted them to do. Today, we have seasoned federal employee and on every inspection. They have a role in the inspections process that they w will from this. Forward the monitoring the inspector to make sure that they are providing the services that we are in for. Thank you for everyone for being here and taking our questions. And giving us your testimony and before adjourning, i asked for unanimous consent to submit statements from that civil uni union. The Immigration Justice Center and counsel on the governor accountability project, and Transgender Law Center and the Asian American to advancing justice, that went out objection, so admitted, the members of the subcommittee may have additional questions for the witnesses and we may thanks the respondents quickly as possible to those questions that went out objection. The committee record shall be kept open for ten days. No further business, the subcommittee stands adjourned. Background sounds. [background sounds] weeknights this week, featuring a tv program showcasing every weekend on cspan. Tonight the same theme is religion. The moral majority, examines both of evangelicals are choosing power over christian values. Professor of history talks about his book there is a god. Respond to atheism in the last days. Columbia contributor reports and safe and religion in middle america. In gotland. Russia beginning at 8 00 p. M. Eastern on cspan. Enjoy book tv this week and every weekend on cspan. Sunday on q a, the smithsonian institution, a history of tariffs and managing the u. S. Economy. The Supreme Court eventually rolled as a vegetable not fruit. Because of the carrot. The tomato. A botanist will say that his hunt tomato is the fruit. But in fact, the 1883 tariff, but a tariff on vegetables and not fruit. So an importer of vegetables pointed out that the tomatoes was bring in some caribbean fruit and he didnt have to pay a tariff. Metal went on for quite some time. Eventually the Supreme Court rules that tomatoes are actually manageable. Its an interesting ruling that had repercussions beyond this tomatoes. Sunday night at eight eastern on cspan his q a. Next a discussion on resettlement efforts in afghanistan and the status of peace talks with the taliban. This if it hosted by the u. S. Institute of peace is about 90 minutes. Good morning, i am the Vice President here at the u. S. Institute of peace. I like to we will you all today and is timely and important discussion