	Background

		Process for Gaining Admission to the United States

Each year, millions of visitors come to the United States legally on a  temporary basis. Federal Agencies Take Actions against a Small Portion of the Estimated Overstay Population, but Strengthening Prioritization and Assessment of Overstay Efforts Could Improve Enforcement

ICE CTCEU is the primary federal entity responsible for taking  enforcement action to address in-country overstays, but it investigates and  arrests a small portion of the estimated in-country overstay population due  to, among other things, ICE’s competing priorities. These cases resulted in approximately 8,100 arrests,  relative to a total estimated overstay population of 4 million to 5.5  million. Data completeness. For  example, 8 U.S.C. From fiscal years  2006 through 2010, ICE reported devoting from 3.1 to 3.4 percent of its  total field office investigative hours to CTCEU overstay investigations, as  shown in figure 4. By developing a time frame for completing a resource and  funding assessment and utilizing the assessment findings, as appropriate,  ICE would be better positioned to hold its staff accountable for  completion of efforts as management intended, thereby strengthening its  planning efforts for executing its overstay enforcement activities moving  forward. CTCEU Could Benefit from Establishing Mechanisms for Assessing Performance to Address Overstays

CTCEU has not yet established mechanisms for assessing its performance  in meeting program goals. DHS creates lookouts for certain  categories of overstays, and expanding the categories of overstays  assigned these lookouts could help improve CBP’s ability to determine if  these nonimmigrants should be re-admitted to the United States. Improved Data Reliability Could Strengthen DHS Processes to Identify Overstays

			DHS Identifies Overstays Primarily Based on Biographic Entry and Exit Data

In the absence of a comprehensive biometric entry and exit system for  identifying and tracking overstays, US-VISIT and CTCEU primarily analyze  biographic entry and exit data collected at land, air, and sea POEs to  identify overstays. First, CBP requires nonimmigrants  leaving the United States through land POEs to remit their I-94/I-94W  arrival and departure forms to record their exit if they do not plan to  return within 30 days. While CBP studied a technological  mechanism for recording biographic departure information at land POEs,  CBP officials stated that the agency has not studied the costs and benefits  of providing a mechanism for nonimmigrants departing the United States  at land POEs to turn in their forms, such as a drop box. However, this program does not help ICE assess the  extent to which the leads it identifies as viable for investigation ultimately  result in an enforcement outcome, such as arrests. Electronic lookouts are one of the primary mechanisms DHS uses to share  information about out-of-country overstays, but the current scope of the  population to which these lookouts are assigned does not include certain  categories of overstays, such as those who overstay by less than 90 days. According to US-VISIT officials, the decision to focus US-VISIT’s  efforts on nonimmigrants who overstayed their authorized period of  admission under these visas by greater than 90 days was reached in  accordance with its customers—CBP and the State Department—in 2006  in order to focus lookout creation on more egregious overstay violators. By establishing a mechanism to collect biographic I- 94/I-94W exit documentation at land POEs to the extent that benefits  outweigh costs, CBP could better ensure the completeness of alien  departure data. Recommendations for Executive Action

To help ICE’s execution of overstay enforcement efforts; and improve  assessment of ICE programs that identify and address overstays so that  program adjustments can be made, if necessary; we recommend that the  Assistant Secretary of Immigration and Customs Enforcement take the  following three actions:    establish a target time frame for assessing the funding and resources ERO  would require in order to assume responsibility for civil overstay  enforcement and use the results of that assessment;    develop outcome-based performance measures—or proxy measures if  program outcomes cannot be captured—and associated targets on  CTCEU’s progress in preventing terrorists and other criminals from  exploiting the nation’s immigration system; and    develop a performance measure for assessing the quality of leads CTCEU  assigns to ICE field offices for investigations, using performance  information already collected by CTCEU. To improve information sharing in support of efforts to identify and take  enforcement action against overstays, we recommend that the Secretary of  Homeland Security direct the Commissioner of Customs and Border  Protection, the Under Secretary of the National Protection and Programs  Directorate, and the Assistant Secretary of Immigration and Customs  Enforcement to assess the costs and benefits of creating biometric and  biographic lookouts for (1) out-of-country overstays of 90 days or less who  entered the country using nonimmigrant business and pleasure visas, and  (2) in-country overstay leads sent to ERO, and create these lookouts, to  the extent that the benefits of doing so outweigh the costs. DHS concurred with our five recommendations and  described actions under way or planned to address them. DHS also  provided technical comments, which we incorporated as appropriate. To determine the extent to which DHS identifies overstays and shares  overstay information among its components and with federal, state, and  local agencies, we analyzed the processes DHS uses to (1) evaluate  suspected overstay records, (2) collect nonimmigrant arrival and  departure information, and (3) share information on overstays among its  component entities and with other federal, state, and local agencies.
Why GAO Did This Study

According to Pew Hispanic Center estimates, approximately 4 million to 5.5 million unauthorized immigrants in the United States entered the country legally on a temporary basis but then overstayed their authorized periods of admission--referred to as overstays. As requested, GAO examined the extent to which the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) (1) takes action to address overstays and its reported results; and (2) identifies overstays and shares this information among its border security and immigration enforcement components. GAO reviewed relevant documents, such as standard operating procedures, DHS guidance, and overstay investigations data from fiscal years 2006 through 2010; interviewed officials from DHS components; and visited 6 DHS field offices and 12 ports of entry based on geographic dispersion, among other factors. The results of these visits are not generalizable, but provided insights into DHS operations.

What GAO Found

DHS takes actions to address a small portion of the estimated overstay population due to, among other things, competing priorities; however, these efforts could be enhanced by improved planning and performance management. Since fiscal year 2006, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the principle DHS component responsible for overstay enforcement, has allocated about 3 percent of its investigative work hours to overstay investigations and its Counterterrorism and Criminal Exploitation Unit (CTCEU), which prioritizes and investigates possible overstays, has arrested approximately 8,100 overstays. ICE is considering assigning some responsibility for noncriminal overstay enforcement to its Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) directorate, which has responsibility for apprehending and removing illegal aliens from the United States. However, ERO does not plan to assume this responsibility until ICE assesses the funding and resources doing so would require. ICE has not established a time frame for completing this assessment. By developing such a time frame and utilizing the assessment findings, as appropriate, ICE could strengthen its planning efforts and be better positioned to hold staff accountable for completing the assessment. In addition, CTCEU does not have mechanisms to assess program performance in accordance with leading performance management practices. By establishing such mechanisms, CTCEU could better ensure that managers have information to assist in making decisions for strengthening overstay enforcement efforts and assessing performance against CTCEU's goals. In the absence of a biometric entry and exit system, DHS uses various methods for identifying overstays, primarily biographic data, and sharing of overstay information; however, DHS faces challenges in collecting departure data and does not share information about all categories of suspected overstays among its components. For example, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the DHS component charged with inspecting all people who enter the United States, does not provide a standard mechanism for nonimmigrants departing the United States through land ports of entry to remit their arrival and departure forms. These forms contain information, such as arrival and departure dates, used by DHS to identify overstays. CBP officials stated that establishing such a mechanism could help the agency increase its collection of departure data, but could also result in costs related to, for example, physical modifications to land ports of entry. If the benefits outweigh the costs, such a mechanism could help DHS obtain more complete and reliable departure data for identifying overstays. DHS also shares overstay information among its components through various mechanisms. For example, DHS creates electronic alerts for certain categories of overstays, such as those who overstay by more than 90 days, but does not create alerts for those who overstay by less than 90 days to focus efforts on more egregious overstay violators, as identified by CBP. Expanding the categories of overstays assigned an alert to the extent that benefits outweigh costs could improve the chance that these individuals are identified as overstays during subsequent encounters with federal officials, such as when they apply for readmission to the United States.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends, among other things, that DHS establish a time frame for completing overstay enforcement planning, performance measurement mechanisms, and, if benefits outweigh costs, a mechanism for collecting departure forms at land borders and alerts for additional categories of overstays. DHS concurred with our recommendations.