	Background

Border Patrol is to apply consequences under CDS to all apprehended  aliens, which numbered over 1.1 million along the southwest border from  fiscal year 2013 through 2015. Border Patrol Methodology for Calculating Recidivism Makes It Difficult to Assess Effectiveness of the Consequence Delivery System

Border Patrol uses an annual recidivism rate for the southwest border,  along with other performance indicators, to monitor the effectiveness of  CDS; however, weaknesses in the methodology used to calculate this  rate limit its usefulness in assessing CDS. Border Patrol Agents Did Not Generally Apply the Consequence Identified in CDS guides as the Most Effective and Efficient in Each Southwest Border Sector

Our analysis of Border Patrol agents’ application of the Most Effective and  Efficient consequences as defined in each southwest border sector’s  CDS guide showed that agents applied the Most Effective and Efficient  consequence for 18 percent of the approximately 300,000 apprehensions  in fiscal year 2015, a decline over the previous two years. Border Patrol has not assessed reasons agent application of the Most  Effective and Efficient consequence in CDS guides is relatively low, but  cited various challenges including agent concerns about whether the  Most Effective and Efficient consequence has a greater impact on  recidivism than other consequences. Sector personnel  are encouraged to review these data when determining the ranking of  CDS consequences from Most Effective and Efficient to Least Effective  and Efficient. According to  CBP, some consequences, such as criminal prosecution, require  involvement and resources of up to four federal agencies. Border Patrol Does Not Have Controls for Its Classification of Aliens Necessary to Apply the Most Effective and Efficient CDS Consequence

Border Patrol reports that agent classification of aliens into one of the  three criminal or four noncriminal classifications pursuant to CDS  guidance is critical to selecting the Most Effective and Efficient  consequence to deter future illegal border crossings. Additional actions on the part  of Border Patrol could strengthen implementation and oversight of the  CDS program. Recommendations for Executive Action

To better inform on the effectiveness of CDS implementation and border  security efforts, we recommend that the Chief of Border Patrol:  strengthen the methodology for calculating recidivism such as by  using an alien’s apprehension history beyond one fiscal year and  excluding aliens for whom there is no record of removal and who may  remain in the United States;  collect information on reasons agents do not apply the CDS guides’  Most Effective and Efficient consequences to assess the extent that  agents’ application of these consequences can be increased and  modify development of CDS guides, as appropriate;  revise CDS guidance to ensure consistent and accurate  methodologies for estimating Border Patrol costs across  consequences and to factor in, where appropriate and available, the  relative costs of any federal partner resources necessary to  implement each consequence; ensure that sector management is monitoring progress in meeting  their performance targets and communicating performance results to  Border Patrol headquarters management; and provide consistent guidance for alien classification and take steps to  ensure CDS PMO and sector management conduct data integrity  activities necessary to strengthen control over the classification of  aliens. DHS did not concur with one recommendation  in the report. With regard to the first recommendation, to strengthen its methodology for  calculating recidivism such as by using an alien's apprehension history  beyond one fiscal year and excluding aliens for whom there is no record  of removal and who may remain in the United States, DHS did not  concur. Figure 11 provides an  overview of Border Patrol’s recidivism rate calculation as well as the three  alternative methods we used to determine the extent to which Border  Patrol’s measure of recidivism assesses CDS effectiveness. For each of the nine Border Patrol sectors along the southwest border  and each of the seven alien classifications, tables 5 and 6 provide:  the unique number of apprehended aliens,  the recidivism rate based on Border Patrol’s methodology (aliens’  apprehension history within fiscal year 2015),  the recidivism rate based on alien apprehension history over three  years (fiscal years 2013 through 2015),  the recidivism rate based on an aliens’ apprehension history over  three years (fiscal years 2013 through 2015) and excluding aliens who  ICE data show have not been removed and may remain in the United  States, and  the percentage of apprehended aliens who ICE data show have not  been removed and may remain in the United States.
Why GAO Did This Study

To address smuggling along the U.S. southwest border, the U.S. Border Patrol developed CDS—a process to classify each apprehended alien into criminal or noncriminal categories and apply consequences, such as federal prosecution. Each Border Patrol sector ranks up to eight consequences from Most to Least Effective and Efficient to reduce recidivism. GAO was asked to review and assess Border Patrol's implementation of CDS across the southwest border. This report examines the extent to which Border Patrol (1) has a methodology for calculating recidivism that allows it to assess CDS program effectiveness, (2) applied consequences it determined to be most effective and efficient in each southwest border sector and (3) established guidance and controls to monitor field implementation of CDS.
GAO analyzed Border Patrol's recidivism rate methodology; apprehension data and CDS application along the southwest border for fiscal years 2013 through 2015, the most recently available data; and DHS's U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement data on alien removals. GAO also interviewed Border Patrol personnel and reviewed CDS guidance.

What GAO Found

The U.S. Border Patrol (Border Patrol), an office within the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) U.S. Customs and Border Protection, uses an annual recidivism rate to measure performance of the Consequence Delivery System (CDS)—a process that identifies consequences as Most Effective and Efficient to deter illegal cross border activity in each sector—however, methodological weaknesses limit the rate's usefulness for assessing CDS effectiveness. GAO found that Border Patrol's methodology does not account for an alien's apprehension history beyond one fiscal year and neither accounts for nor excludes apprehended aliens for whom there is no record of removal after apprehension and who may have remained in the United States without an opportunity to recidivate. GAO's analysis of recidivism for fiscal year 2015 considering these factors showed a 29 percent recidivism rate, compared to Border Patrol's 14 percent recidivism rate. Border Patrol could more accurately assess recidivism and CDS effectiveness by strengthening its recidivism rate methodology, such as by using an alien's apprehension history beyond one fiscal year and excluding aliens for whom there is no record of removal from the United States.
Agent application of consequences Border Patrol identified in CDS guidance as the Most Effective and Efficient has declined from 28 percent in fiscal year 2013 to 18 percent in fiscal year 2015 across the southwest border. In addition, Border Patrol has not assessed reasons for the relatively low application of consequences determined to be the Most Effective and Efficient consequence in each sector; but some agency officials stated that challenges include agents' hesitation to apply consequences that require referral to federal partners facing capacity constraints, such as Department of Justice immigration courts. Assessing why agents do not apply the Most Effective and Efficient consequence could inform Border Patrol of actions needed to increase application of Most Effective and Efficient consequences to reduce recidivism. Border Patrol established some mechanisms to facilitate monitoring field implementation of CDS, but lacked controls to ensure effective performance management. For example, six of nine field locations missed performance targets for application of the Most Effective and Efficient consequences in fiscal year 2015 as shown in the figure below. Ensuring consistent oversight of performance management would provide greater assurance that Border Patrol is most effectively using CDS to address cross-border illegal activity.

What GAO Recommends

GAO is making six recommendations to strengthen the methodology for measuring recidivism, assess reasons agents do not apply CDS guides' Most Effective and Efficient consequence, and ensure performance management oversight. DHS concurred with all but one recommendation, which relates to strengthening its recidivism methodology, citing other means to measure CDS performance. GAO believes the recommendation remains valid, as discussed in the report.