I’m reminded by this report on the San Diego refugee housing scandal at Inewsource.org.
The US State Department on some sporadic basis sends monitors out to refugee resettlement offices around the country to see if your local resettlement agency is compliant with guidelines for the care of refugees they have placed.
Years ago I spoke with Chris Coen who had a blog called ‘Friends of Refugees’ and he regularly submitted Freedom of Information Actrequests to the State Department for those monitoring reports, then patiently waited YEARS to get responses. Lacking patience, I never sought them (little did I imagine that nearly 11 years later, I am still doing this!). IRC’s representative in San Diego: Mireille Cronin Mather
Now that we know that the Tillerson State Department is trying to clear its FOIA backlog, maybe some of you should try again to get the reports for contractors operating in your towns.
Clearly the reporters at Inewsource.org were able to obtain one for the International Rescue Committee in San Diego.
Here is the title and first paragraph of their latest report. The contractors are extremely vulnerable on the issue of how they care for refugees they are paid to care for (I’ve been hearing it for years), and it goes to the heart of the question about whether this is really a ‘humanitarian’ program or simply driven by money.
Federal monitors warned San Diego refugee nonprofit of problems with resettlement practices
Federal monitors raised concerns about a local refugee resettlement agency’s housing placement practices months before the organization’s employees committed additional violations, which KPBS uncovered and detailed in a series of reports last year.
Hereis the State Department’s FOIA guideline site.
If you need to know which resettlement agencies are working near you, go here for a directory. Pick offices that are within a hundred miles of your home.
This post is filed in my ‘What you can do’ category, see here.
This is really a nothingburger story at a college newspaper, but I was drawn by the headline, and, since I hadn’t mentioned Colorado much lately, am posting it.
I will bet that none of these protesters for more refugees ever gave any serious monetary donations to the local program because they have come to expect their Christian ‘charity’ comes from the government.
Trump’s Secretive Changes to the Process of Reviewing Refugees
The story then goes on to explain how the vetting process is being tightened and that the local Lutheran contractor’s office is shrinking. It is the same sob story we are hearing from sea to shining sea.
And, I continue to contend that the whole Ponzi-scheme system of paying ‘religious’ charities like the Lutherans with federal dollars to place refugees on a per head basis is crashing and a major part of the blame (for staff reductions and refugees left in the lurch) rests with the agencies like this one in Colorado (a subcontractor of the ‘mothership’—Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Servicesin turmoil at the moment) that never raised enough private money to tide them over in downturn times like this.
LOL! A good friend recently coined the phrase: “Live by the government, die by the government.”
Sohere is some of what reporter Aleryan says about Colorado Springs.
By the way, no mention anywhere about how the refugees were pouring in to Colorado to supply meatpackers with cheap labor (LIRS even has a contract with Brazilian-owned slaughterhouse—JBS—headquartered in Greeley!).
President Trump’s executive order to ban refugees from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen from coming into the United States, known as “The Muslim Ban,” is what we often talk about and see on news regarding any refugee status or immigration policy. However, is the Muslim Ban what really affects the arrival of refugees in American cities such as Colorado Springs?
Laura Liibbe is the community programs coordinator at Lutheran Family Services, Colorado’s local organization that is responsible for refugee settlement, among other affairs. Liibbe studied international development and teaches English as a second language, which was what inspired her to get involved with the organization. Her work primarily entails connecting refugees to the resources they need in Colorado Springs. [Connecting to resources=signing them up for welfare—ed] She has been working with LFS for six years.
[….]
When the refugee ban was finally lifted, people believed that refugees could again enter the U.S.. However, Trump had already implemented secretive policies that were not at the forefront of the news, so refugees were still not granted access to the country.
The security processes that Trump altered made it impossible for some cases to be processed. The security screening process usually entails refugees providing medical documents, background checking, verification of their refugee status, and their employment history for 10 years. That process is already difficult for some refugees to fulfill, especially if they fled their country and do not have access to their official documents. This process was made more difficult by mandating a 15 or 20 year verification of employment and other documents.
Trump also took resources from refugee reviewing processes that were reallocated to U.S. asylum cases. Liibbe emphasized that this move was not necessarily bad, but she criticizes the shift of resources instead of investing in new and increased resources. The refugee reviewing process is now significantly slower due to the loss of financial support and expertise. Each year, the President chooses a number of refugees to accept. This year, Trump’s administration decided on 45,000, but due to the slowed nature of the process, only 18,000 are expected to be approved and able to enter this year.
[….]
Liibbe emphasized that the city of Colorado Springs has the resources, the capacity, and the capabilities to receive refugees. In the past, they have settled 150 refugees a year with ease. Now, Liibbe insists that we will see a major decrease in that number. This decrease will deeply affect the LFS partnerships because their government funding is dependent on how many refugees they settle.
Can you say Ponzi-scheme! For regular readers this per refugee head payment business is old news, but believe me, ten years ago when I began writing about the program, no media ever mentioned that critical fact! Come on Congress, time to get off your butts and either dump or reform the Refugee Act of 1980! Endnote to Ms. Aleryan: You might be interested in writing about the contracts LIRS has with meatpackers especially since this agency—Lutheran Family Services, Rocky Mountains—helped secure the contracts. Humanitarianism is not the primary driving force behind the UN/US Refugee Admissions Program! Big business and the Chamber of Commerce is! (Dems get voters of course!)
As you know, World Reliefis one of the nine federal refugee contractors*** that depends on federal money to do its work.
Earlier this month we reported on their presence on Capitol Hill pushing for amnesty for the DACA ‘kids’ at a press conference headlined by Oklahoma Republican Senator James Lankford (have you noticed that Lankford is a FOX Newshound lately).
Republican Senator James Lankford headlined the World Relief presser earlier this month on behalf of amnesty for the so-called ‘Dreamers.’ That is World Relief lobbyist Jenny Yang on far right. Should any of our tax dollars be used for religious Left advocacy? And, will Lankford be their man to help them keep their government boodle?
World Relief’s out front role on behalf of illegal aliens raises questions about their financial support from the US State Department and HHS as refugee contractors as you can see in this story with the headline:
Conflict of Interest? World Relief, Refugee Resettlement and Immigration Debate
Recently, World Relief convened Christian leaders to speak out for immigrants. After some raised questions on their mission and motives, the aid group responds.
Hereis the story at The Stream (hat tip: Chris)which begins with a few words about the DACA vote, then this:
Some Senate leaders still see an opportunity to pass a targeted bill that could pass both chambers. The Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program expires on March 5. More than 700,000 immigrants, many brought to the U.S. as children, will face potential deportation. Senator James Lankford, R-Okla., vowed to keep working in coming weeks towards a solution.
Lankford appeared recently at a press conference convened by World Relief. He spoke alongside faith leaders who advocate the cause of immigrants and refugees. In interviews with The Stream, some questioned World Relief’s role in the coalition.
“I don’t doubt that these groups have sincere convictions,” states Mark Tooley, president of the Institute on Religion and Democracy. “But World Relief and various Catholic relief groups get government dollars for refugee resettlement while lobbying for immigration causes. So there is a seeming self-interest.”
If money is not a driving factor, then they should say no thanks and not take another dime from US taxpayers! ‘Christian’ verbiage doesn’t cut it! Let them demonstrate Christian love with privately donated funds! The Stream continues….
Jenny Yang, vice president of advocacy at World Relief, responds in an interview. “Money has never been a driving factor,”she says. “Our staff members feel it is part of their missional calling to reach the nations for Christ by loving their immigrant neighbors. They make minimal amounts of money in doing this work.”
World Relief critic Kullberg. https://evangelicalsforbiblicalimmigration.com/
World Relief operates as one of nine voluntary agencies with contracts under the U.S. refugee resettlement program. Since last year, the inflow of refugees into the U.S. has been drastically cut. Interviews with leaders on both sides reveal divisions — even when values are shared.
Often on Capitol Hill, Yang’s role is to advocate for human rights and religious liberty. “Any time we speak up on an issue, it really is out of knowing people personally in relationship,” says Yang. “Whether we’re speaking out on the food crisis in South Sudan or other parts of Africa, or we’re speaking up for immigrants in the U.S., it’s because these are individuals we know and serve in our ministry.”
Kelly Kullberg has been a volunteer missionary in seven nations. In the early 1990’s, she served at a World Relief project in Central America.“We helped reclaim a San Salvador garbage dump,” she recalls. “The project won a U.N. award as a redeemed home for 8,000 people.”
Since 2013, Kullberg has headed up Evangelicals for Biblical Immigration. The loose coalition critiques what it calls “pro-amnesty evangelicals.”
Today, she asserts a troubling agenda drives the venerable aid agency. “World Relief once did great Christian gospel work around the world — both in word and deed,” says Kullberg. “Perhaps World Relief should explain how they’ve received more than $256 million in U.S. government grants for resettling immigrants and refugees.”
The funding figure comes from official government sources at USASpending.gov. “While they still do work overseas, it seems that the priority has become refugee work in the U.S,” states Kullberg.
[….]
Concerns for Christian witness are at the heart of her criticisms, Kullberg claims.
Federal grant rules prohibit witnessing to refugees about Christ!
“By taking federal money, World Relief and other voluntary agencies cannot legally share the gospel of Jesus Christ, verbally, with those they are serving,” she says.“World Relief should consider the whole counsel of Scripture, the long-term consequences of their work and get back to their original mission.”
[….]
“We also adhere to strict humanitarian policies and guidelines. In our international and U.S. programs, we don’t engage in proselytism. [NO! Because they would lose their federal money!—-ed]
The Department of State has cooperative agreements with nine domestic resettlement agencies to resettle refugees. While some of the agencies have religious affiliations, they are not allowed to proselytize.
There is much more in this story, please continue reading here.
See our complete archive on World Relief byclicking here.
*** These are the nine federally funded refugee agencies operating in the US.
The number in parenthesis is the percentage of their income paid by you (the taxpayer) to place the refugees and get them signed up for their services (aka welfare)! From most recent accounting, here. There will never be reform of the US Refugee Admissions Program as long as those organizations paid to place refugees in American towns and cities are also able to do political community organizing and lobby for more refugees and more money for themselves.
If, as Yang says, money has not been a driving factor, how about just saying no. We challenge World Relief to survive by giving up nearly 73% of its present income.
I told youhere earlier this month about the long knives being out to destroy the nomination of Ken Isaacs a Veep at Samaritan’s Purse to head the IOM.
President Trump has nominated Isaacs to head the International Organization for Migration which not very long ago was another NGO receiving millions of US taxpayer dollars to do the foreign end of refugee processing in to the US (among other things). Now they have been officially folded in to the UN.
Of course, I would like to see the IOM squeezed financially, but at minimum the President should not be bullied by this pair (with the Washington Post!). Knife number one: CAIR’s Ibrahim Hooper
In my earlier post I said the President should not back down to the long knives lead by Eric Schwartz and CAIR’s Ibrahim Hooper. Here is newswith the latest on the controversy, hat tip: Richard at Blue Ridge Forum.
A bipartisan group of leading human-rights activists, including a Pulitzer-prize-winning New York Times columnist, has jumped to the defense of President Trump’s choice to lead the United Nation’s International Organization for Migration (IOM), which uses its $1 billion annual budget to promote worldwide cooperation on refugee and trafficking issues.
Trump nominated Ken Isaacs, vice president of the Christian relief organization Samaritan’s Purse, in January to head the 169-member organization, which holds elections to name a leader but typically defers to United States’ choice to run the organization.
Knife number two: Eric Schwartz, a hard Left one-worlder who ran the refugee program in the early years of the Obama Admin, and is a George SOROS protege.
Isaacs, who served in the Bush administration as the director of the Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance at the U.S. Agency for International Development, has spent 30 years organizing large-scale emergency relief programs in some of the most dangerous and desperate places in the world, including Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Cambodia, Darfur, Iraq, Liberia, Somalia, Eritrea, and Rwanda.
The day the White House announced his nomination, Isaacs was in Bangladesh administering diphtheria treatment to Muslim-majority Rohingya refugees.
Now, two weeks later, lifetime colleagues and allies in the humanitarian community are furiously trying to save his nomination after an Obama State Department official and a spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations accused Isaacs of tweeting anti-Islamic and anti-immigrant statements.
In a Washington Post article, the pair of critics took issue with a number of Isaacs’ views, including the belief that the Koran instructs its followers to engage in violent jihad, that Middle East Christians should be given first priority when applying to the U.S. government for refugee status, and that President Obama’s policy of accepting large numbers of Syrian refugees was “foolish and delusional” because some of them could become “security risks” if allowed in the United States.
After the article, Isaacs apologized for his “careless” social media posts and vowed to lead the IOM with “the highest standards of humanity, human dignity, and equality,” if chosen.
The paper later editorialized against the nomination, arguing Isaacs’s views were “venomous,” demonstrated “bigotry,” and that his leadership in the post would be “an embarrassment to the United States.”
Continue reading here.
Dear Donald, don’t let the Washington Post (Bezos), CAIR and Schwartz win this one!
That is what Breitbart’s Michael Patrick Leahy is reporting about his efforts to get an answer from the major funding source for the nine federal contractors*** hired by State for the US Refugee Admissions Program. Leahy’s story is entitled:
U.S. Government Continues to Fund Refugee Resettlement NGO Whose Funding Has Been Frozen by the U.K.
(We reported on the mess the International Refugee Committee is in with its British funding, here.) Miliband and Soros in 2013. “The IRC is one of the charities closely-linked to George Soros’s push to drive aliens into European Union (EU) nations.” http://www.breitbart.com/london/2018/02/16/soros-backed-migrant-importation-ngo/
Here is some of what Leahy is reportingafter attempting to get something definitive from the State Department:
The government of the United Kingdom has frozen all payments to the International Rescue Committee (IRC), one of the largest non-profit refugee resettlement agencies in the world, pending the outcome of an investigation into allegations of “sexual harassment and fraud” in the organization.
As one of the nine voluntary agencies (VOLAGs) that have for decades received about $1 billion annually from the U.S. federal government, the IRC is also heavily funded by American taxpayers.
The IRC is the third VOLAG in the last six months to come under scrutiny for questions surrounding its leadership and management.
[….]
The management and leadership of former U.K. Foreign Secretary David Miliband, who has served as CEO of the IRC since 2013 and receives an annual salary of $671,000, is now under serious question, and his ability to maintain his current job is uncertain.
The State Department offered no indication that it intends to stop funding the IRC, despite the actions of the U.K government when asked specifically by Breitbart News if the U.S. government currently has plans to immediately stop making payments to the IRC to conduct refugee resettlement operations in the United States.
“The Department of State takes very seriously the prevention and response of all accusations of sexual exploitation and abuse,” a State Department spokesperson told Breitbart News when asked if the U.S. government intends to follow the lead of the U.K. government in suspending payments to the IRC pending the results of an investigation.
[….]
The State Department has not responded to this follow up question from Breitbart News: Now that the allegations of abuse against the IRC have been brought to the State Department’s attention, what specifically is the State Department doing to ensure the IRC is taking the necessary steps to address the issue appropriately?
Continue readinghere.
Quick, someone tell the IRC’s new partner—Sesame Street!
See my David Miliband archive by clicking here.
If the IRC does have any government funds frozen, even temporarily, it will be a blow to their subcontractors (working in cities below) that are wholly dependent on the IRC mothership in Manhattan. (IRC website):
*** These are the nine federally funded refugee agencies operating in the US.
The number in parenthesis is the percentage of their income paid by you (the taxpayer) to place the refugees and get them signed up for their services (aka welfare)! From most recent accounting, here.
