This is a story we missed earlier this month, but Chris Coen at Friends of Refugees blog spotted the news and reported on it here. (Hat tip: Joanne)
Eskinder Negash resigns.
Eskinder Negash, who has served as the Director of the Office of Refugee Resettlement for the last six years, tendered his resignation on December 9th, see it here, calling himself not a “political man.” Of course the implication is that the job is a meat-grinder.
We don’t know what was going on behind the scenes that would push Negash out without having a plan for his future (as he indicates in his letter), but my big problem with his position there is that he himself was a federal contractor at the supposedly charitable US Committee for Refugees and Immigrants (USCRI), now on the federal payroll for 99% of its funds, before he came to the ORR. By the way, the present head honcho at USCRI (Negash’s former boss) was also Bill Clinton’s Director of the ORR!
His partner over at the US State Department, Anne Richard, is also a former contractor. And, I will bet that Negash is replaced by yet another high ranking executive from one of the nine federal contractors.***
The incestuous nature of the relationship between grantor and grantee must be investigated by Congress! You can be sure the present system does not bode well for the US taxpayer being assured that waste, fraud and abuse is being monitored closely. Heck, if there was an effort to seriously watch the contractors, the federal manager (Richard or Negash) would never get a job on the outside in the refugee industry again.
*** These are the nine VOLAGs (contractors) which monopolize the refugee resettlement program. Let’s see which one sends a top level staffer to replace Negash!
WTH! A preferred resettlement site? More waiters needed?
Update April 15, 2016: There is a more up-to-date list of preferred communities in the 2014 ORR report to Congress. Click here and go to page 51 for the list.
Since everyone (thousands of you) really liked the map of America with the 180 or so cities where the US State Department and the Office of Refugee Resettlement (HHS) are resettling refugees, I thought it might be a good idea to update the “preferred” communities list.
The ORR says these 82 (or so) preferred communities offer the best chance for refugees to find jobs and become self-sufficient, but really they are the cities with overload problems and with especially challenging and needy refugees (cases needing “intensive case management”). So to help ameliorate the problem, the feds throw more grant money to the contractors!
Here are the contractors receiving grants now for “preferred” sites. By the way, this program is only open to the big nine contractors that monopolize the program. Then they funnel your money to their subcontractors (here). See on the “affiliates” list that there are addresses in cities involved that are not on my list below, so I would look to those cities too as now in refugee overload or getting there.
This possibly incomplete list of cities is cobbled together from information in the ORR’s 2012 Annual Report to Congress, p. 47 and a previous post we wrote, here. There may be some new “preferred” communities I’m not yet aware of. And, note, if comparing lists, that I inadvertently left out Wichita, Kansas on my earlier list.
Recently added in red (or ones I missed in a previous review). Again this is not a complete list of where refugees are being resettled, it merely highlights those where the contractor has over the last few years received additional money from the US Treasury in order to cope with problems there:
Arizona: Tucson, Phoenix
California: San Diego, Sacramento, Modesto, Walnut Creek
Where in the USA are the refugees and the resettlement offices?
I just came across this very useful map for FY2013-2014 at the Office of Refugee Resettlement (HHS)to help you research what is happening with the Refugee Resettlement program in your state.
When you go to the site and click on your state, all of the federal money flowing there is available as well as a list of locations where refugees are resettled with names and contact information for those doing the resettlement.
I can’t emphasize enough how important it is for you to learn about the program where you live. I know it’s an overused expression, but knowledge is power. And, that is why we started this blog in the first place to help you gain that knowledge.
Click here for ORR’s interactive state map! (When you look at the map, you might want to go here for information on what a Wilson-Fish state is).
ORR Regional Offices
In 2013, ORR Director Eskinder Negash, announced the creation of Regional refugee resettlement offices to coordinate state offices. At that time there were regional refugee offices located within five of the ten Administration for Children and Family (ACF) offices.
ORR will open up to five regional offices in Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, Denver, and San Francisco (and potentially additional regional locations).
Click hereto see the ten ACF regions and regional headquarters.
The press release from Senators Grassley, Hatch and Coburn just released today reads as follows (hat tip: Rosemary).
WASHINGTON – Senators Chuck Grassley, Orrin Hatch and Tom Coburn are asking the Government Accountability Office to review policies of the Office of Refugee Resettlement, the agency charged with caring for unaccompanied minors crossing the southern U.S. border.
Senator Charles Grassley of Iowa and others want answers from the Office of Refugee Resettlement. Good luck!
The senators questioned the ability of the Office of Refugee and Resettlement (ORR) to accommodate the recent influx and how the office has prepared to deal with another surge which the administration suggests could include up to 145,000 more unaccompanied minors.
“The increase in the number of unaccompanied children crossing the border has strained the capacity of ORR and its grantees to provide them with appropriate accommodations and has raised questions about ORR’s management and oversight of the program,” Grassley, Hatch and Coburn wrote.
The senators also raised concerns about the sponsors to whom these unaccompanied minors are being released.
“In addition, concerns have been raised about children who are subsequently released to relatives or other sponsors throughout the country, including how sponsors are screened and monitored while they have custody of the children. The agency is responsible for the well-being of these children, yet there’s question about whether custodians and grantees are adequately being overseen once a child leaves federal custody,” the senators wrote.
Grassley, Hatch and Coburn are Ranking Members of the Judiciary, Finance and Homeland Security and Government Affairs committees respectively.
Below is the text of the Senators’ letter, including questions they would like GAO to investigate.
As long-time readers here know these studies can take months to complete (remember the Lugar study?), and having watched the ORR in action you know they will stall and drag this out for years! So, don’t hold your breath!
The Honorable Gene L. Dodaro
Comptroller General of the United States
U.S. Government Accountability Office
441 G Street NW
Washington, DC 20548
Dear Comptroller General Dodaro:
According to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, more than 57,000 children under the age of 18 traveling without an adult were apprehended at the United States’ southwest border between October 1, 2013 and June 30, 2014. This was nearly twice the number apprehended during the same 9-month period a year earlier, and since that time, thousands more have entered through the southern border.
The Homeland Security Act of 2002 gave the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) responsibility for the care and custody of unaccompanied minors without legal immigration status as they await immigration proceedings, and the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 expanded HHS’s role in this area. Within HHS, the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) is responsible for providing shelter and care to these children through cooperative agreements with non-profit organizations that ORR refers to as grantees. Grantees house children in a safe and appropriate environment pending either placement with sponsors in the U.S. or return to their home country.
The increase in the number of unaccompanied children crossing the border has strained the capacity of ORR and its grantees to provide them with appropriate accommodations and has raised questions about ORR’s management and oversight of the program. Taxpayer funding has been reprogrammed for the increase in unaccompanied alien minors, and additional funding for fiscal year 2015 has been requested by the administration. Yet, it’s unclear if a strategy has been formulated to deal with the impending surge in the next fiscal year, which the administration suggests could include up to 145,000 more unaccompanied alien minors.
In addition, concerns have been raised about children who are subsequently released to relatives or other sponsors throughout the country, including how sponsors are screened and monitored while they have custody of the children. The agency is responsible for the well-being of these children, yet there’s question about whether custodians and grantees are adequately being overseen once a child leaves federal custody.
In light of these issues, we would like to request that GAO examine the following questions:
(1) What steps has ORR taken to increase its capacity to accommodate unaccompanied alien children, including developing systems to efficiently place children in approved facilities, identifying additional appropriate facilities, and expanding the use of foster care placements?
(2) How is ORR screening potential sponsors for unaccompanied alien children and ensuring that the agreements sponsors enter into with ORR are complied with?
(3) How is ORR overseeing and monitoring the placement and care of unaccompanied alien children? Does ORR collaborate with state childcare licensing entities to determine the safety and well-being of children served from their perspective?
(4) To what extent is ORR collaborating and sharing information with other government entities, such as the Department of Homeland Security and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, about the whereabouts and well being of children?
(5) What practices and planning mechanisms does ORR have in place to deal with seasonal migration issues, including predicting spikes and patterns, and planning for emergency situations? Does ORR have written plans in place? What bed capacity does ORR feel is adequate to meet the needs of unaccompanied alien minors protected to migrate to the United States in 2015 and 2016?
(6) How does ORR vet and then oversee grantees? What role does cost play in the analysis of applications by grantees? Would there be any advantages or cost savings if ORR used government contracts rather than grants to fund facilities for unaccompanied alien children? How much is ORR paying per unaccompanied alien children in both temporary and permanent shelter and has this amount changed in the past five years? Are grantees abiding by all government requirements? We believe these questions, along with a detailed breakdown of how ORR grantees are spending this money, would be beneficial.
(7) What policies – both written and unwritten – does ORR or its grantees have in place that govern access to facilities that house or care for unaccompanied minors? Are there policies or practices in place that restrict access by the public or by members of Congress, and to what extent are they followed?
(8) To what extent is ORR or its grantees collaborating with communities where children are being placed to ensure that communities can prepare for placements and children have access to appropriate supports?
Thank you for your attention to this request. If you have any additional questions, please contact our staff: Kathy Nuebel (Senator Grassley), Becky Shipp (Senator Hatch) or Dan Lips (Senator Coburn).
Sincerely,
Charles E. Grassley
Ranking Member
Senate Judiciary Committee
Orrin Hatch
Ranking Member
Senate Finance Committee
Tom Coburn
Ranking Member
Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee
For new readers, former Senator Richard Lugar asked for (and got) a GAO study on the refugee program a few years ago.
From start to finish the report took two years to complete! It was requested in July 2010 and was published July 2012 and sits on a shelf somewhere.
His big concern then was the impact on communities that were being loaded up with refugees with little or no warning or consultation with Washington. You can review the study here, but I never saw it have any impact (other than some negative press for the program). It never resulted in any Congressional action or reform—no hearings, no review of the law, no nothing.
Meanwhile the “children” are escaping, stealing cars and scaring senior citizens, here.
All of our coverage of ‘unaccompanied minors’ is here.
Albert Mbanfu, Director of the International Center in Bowling Green, Kentucky. http://www.bgdailynews.com/new-international-center-director/image_02fb9de4-89e7-5d6d-97e8-6cf648b73901.html?mode=jqm
This is one of the many ways your local refugee resettlement contractor is able to hand out government (your) cash to refugees and surely get a little cash for themselves for administering the program. (There are also micro-enterprise loan programs especially for refugees as well).
The local contractor gets a grant from ORR and then refugees may sign up for the savings plan.
For every dollar they save toward certain savings goals, they are matched with a dollar from the US Treasury. Frankly the complete unfairness of the program to American low income people is often responsible for the hard feelings toward some refugees in certain areas.
We have heard disgruntled citizens ask, for example: how are they getting cars?
We have reported on this program often but the story we mentioned from Kentucky (yesterday) contained a reference to the program that you may not have noticed, so I thought some clarification was needed.
Here is the section of the ‘Refugees get new homes’Bowling Green article (hat tip: Robin) that I want you to see:
When Me Meh and her family escaped Burma for a refugee camp in Thailand, they lived in a bamboo house without electricity or other amenities.
The family of 10 resettled in Bowling Green in 2009, bringing with them only some clothes and important papers, Meh said. She was 17. Meh’s two older brothers and her father started work while she went to school and her mother took care of their home.
After a couple of years, the three had saved $4,000. She said the International Center gave them a grant that matched their savings, and they were able to put a downpayment on a house.
The reader is left with the impression that this very nice resettlement contractor—the International Center—was being generous, but this is taxpayer money that was only passed-through the contractor’s coffers!
Go herefor a recent list of grantees for the multi-million dollar program. And, for more information you might want to look at page 38-40 of the FY2012 Annual Report to Congress. While you are visiting the Annual Report, check out all of the other grant programs that refugee contractors can apply for. You will be amazed!
Addendum: I was once told by an official involved with the refugee program in Washington that there is no financial audit done of these resettlement contractors.
