Immigration Benefits: Additional Efforts Needed to Help Ensure
Alien Files Are Located when Needed (27-OCT-06, GAO-07-85).
To document the interactions of aliens with the Department of
Homeland Security's (DHS) United States Citizenship and
Immigration Services (USCIS) and other government entities, USCIS
creates alien files, or A-files. While deemed critical,
especially in making citizenship decisions, A-files are sometimes
missing during adjudications. In 2002, naturalization was granted
to an alien whose A-file was missing and who was later found to
be associated with a terrorist organization. GAO focused its
review on (1) how often USCIS adjudicates naturalization
applications without an A-file and why, (2) the effect that
missing A-files can have on the adjudication process, and (3)
steps taken to help mitigate the risk of missing A-files. To
address these questions, GAO interviewed officials and staff from
USCIS and reviewed relevant data, policies, and procedures
related to processing naturalization applications and the
automated file-tracking system DHS established to track the
movement of A-files.
-------------------------Indexing Terms-------------------------
REPORTNUM: GAO-07-85
ACCNO: A62724
TITLE: Immigration Benefits: Additional Efforts Needed to Help
Ensure Alien Files Are Located when Needed
DATE: 10/27/2006
SUBJECT: Accountability
Aliens
Audits
Eligibility determinations
Immigration
Immigration information systems
Internal controls
Naturalization
Program evaluation
Program management
Records management
Risk assessment
Risk management
INS Central Index System
******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a **
** GAO Product. **
** **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced. Tables are included, but **
** may not resemble those in the printed version. **
** **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed **
** document's contents. **
** **
******************************************************************
GAO-07-85
* [1]Results in Brief
* [2]Background
* [3]Extent to Which Naturalization Cases Are Adjudicated without
* [4]Missing A-files Can Affect the Naturalization Adjudication P
* [5]Naturalization Quality Procedures Help to Mitigate the Risk
* [6]Conclusions
* [7]Recommendations for Executive Action
* [8]Agency Comments and Our Evaluation
* [9]GAO Contact
* [10]Staff Acknowledgments
* [11]GAO's Mission
* [12]Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony
* [13]Order by Mail or Phone
* [14]To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs
* [15]Congressional Relations
* [16]Public Affairs
Report to Congressional Requesters
United States Government Accountability Office
GAO
October 2006
IMMIGRATION BENEFITS
Additional Efforts Needed to Help Ensure Alien Files Are Located when
Needed
GAO-07-85
Contents
Letter 1
Results in Brief 3
Background 5
Extent to Which Naturalization Cases Are Adjudicated without an A-file
Appears Low, but Compliance with File-Tracking Procedures Is Lacking 10
Missing A-files Can Affect the Naturalization Adjudication Process in
Several Ways 13
Naturalization Quality Procedures Help to Mitigate the Risk of
Adjudicating a Naturalization Application without an A-file 15
Conclusions 16
Recommendations for Executive Action 16
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 16
Appendix I Scope and Methodology 19
Appendix II Comments from the Department of Homeland Security 21
Appendix III GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 24
Tables
Table 1: Results from Los Angeles District File Audit for Three Locations
12
Figures
Figure 1: Steps Involved in Locating A-files for Naturalization
Applications 9
Abbreviations:
CLAIMS Computer-Linked Application Information Management System CBP
Customs and Border Protection DHS Department of Homeland Security FBI
Federal Bureau of Investigation IBIS Interagency Border Inspection System
ICE Immigration and Customs Enforcement NFTS National File Tracking System
NQP Naturalization Quality Procedures ROH Records Operation Handbook USCIS
United States Citizenship and Immigration Services
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without further permission from GAO. However, because this
work may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this material
separately.
United States Government Accountability Office
Washington, DC 20548
October 27, 2006
The Honorable Susan M. Collins Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security
and Governmental Affairs United States Senate
The Honorable Charles E. Grassley Chairman, Committee on Finance United
States Senate
The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), within the
Department of Homeland Security (DHS), is responsible for processing
noncitizens' applications (sometimes commonly referred to as benefit
applications) to live and in some cases work in the United States either
permanently or on a temporary basis or to become a United States citizen.
For certain noncitizens, such as immigrants, USCIS creates an alien file,
called an A-file, to serve as the one central file for all of the
noncitizen's immigration-related applications and related documents. USCIS
manages over 55 million A-files. Not only do USCIS staff rely on an
alien's historical A-file to determine eligibility for immigration
benefits, but other DHS components, such as Immigration and Customs
Enforcement (ICE), use A-files during criminal investigations and to
determine, for example, whether an alien should be removed from or allowed
to stay in the United States. Information and documents from A-files may
also be shared with other law enforcement agencies, such as the Federal
Bureau of Investigation (FBI), to investigate individuals suspected of
being involved in terrorist activities. Consequently, it is critical that
A-files be available when needed. Because A-files are paper-based, they
require physical transfer from one location to another. USCIS has
developed an automated file-tracking system, called the National File
Tracking System (NFTS), to enable all DHS staff at numerous DHS locations
around the country to locate, request, receive, and transfer A-files. NFTS
users are to access USCIS's NFTS intranet site via their personal
computers to locate and request an A-file and update NFTS when they
receive an A-file or transfer an A-file to another person or office.
Naturalization is the process whereby a noncitizen becomes a United States
citizen. An application for naturalization is both the last step in the
immigration process and the last opportunity for USCIS, through its
benefit-granting review procedures, to prevent ineligible noncitizens from
becoming citizens and hence remaining in the United States.^1 In 2002,
USCIS's predecessor, the Immigration and Naturalization Service, granted
naturalization to a noncitizen who was later identified to be associated
with a terrorist organization. In this case, the adjudicator had not
obtained the A-file in adjudicating the application for naturalization and
deciding to grant the benefit. Indeed, background checks conducted as part
of USCIS's naturalization process continue to reveal instances where
individuals who pose a potential risk to national security have applied
for naturalization. Because naturalization is the final benefit that USCIS
can bestow upon a noncitizen, it is critical that USCIS staff have access
to the full and complete history of an applicant--which is contained only
in the A-file--before making a final eligibility decision.
Because of the importance of the naturalization decision, we focused our
review on the availability of A-files in adjudicating naturalization
applications. For this report we examined (1) the extent to which USCIS
records how often naturalization applications are adjudicated without an
A-file, as well as the reasons why an A-file might be missing; (2) the
effect that missing A-files can have on the adjudication of naturalization
applications; and (3) what steps USCIS takes to help mitigate the risk of
adjudicating naturalization applications without an A-file.
To address these objectives, we sent e-mail questionnaires and followed up
with phone calls to officials and staff from 13 USCIS district offices and
reviewed relevant documents, policies, and procedures on processing
naturalization applications. We also obtained written responses from
another district for a total of 14 district offices. We selected these
offices because they adjudicated most of the naturalization applications.
Specifically, USCIS data indicate that these 14 offices adjudicated nearly
two-thirds of the approximately 715,000 naturalization applications
adjudicated in fiscal year 2005. To examine the extent to which USCIS
records how often naturalization applications are adjudicated without an
A-file and why A-files might be missing, we obtained summary data from a
USCIS database containing information on whether an A-file was available
when adjudicating a naturalization application. We also obtained summary
data from NFTS on A-files indicated as lost and, as having been in transit
and yet to be recorded as received. We also interviewed officials from
USCIS headquarters and obtained instructions and guidance about using,
locating, and requesting A-files. To determine the effect that missing
A-files can have on the adjudication process, we interviewed USCIS
district office officials and staff. To determine if USCIS has instituted
additional procedures to help mitigate the risk of adjudicating a
naturalization application without an A-file, we reviewed policies and
procedures related to processing these applications, interviewed USCIS
officials, and reviewed relevant documents. In a prior review we
determined how USCIS ensures the quality and consistency of adjudicator
decisions by examining USCIS's two quality assurance programs and
resulting outcomes, and reviewed the findings and recommendations of an
independent study of USCIS's quality assurance programs.^2 To assess the
reliability of USCIS's system for managing naturalization applications and
NFTS data we (1) reviewed summary data and specific data elements for
obvious errors in accuracy and completeness, (2) reviewed related
documentation, and (3) interviewed USCIS staff knowledgeable about USCIS's
system for managing naturalization applications and NFTS. We found the
data from its system for managing naturalization applications and its
quality assurance database were sufficiently reliable for our purposes.
Regarding NFTS, we found that the summary data we used were sufficiently
reliable for the purposes of this report. We conducted our review from
August 2005 through August 2006 in accordance with generally accepted
government auditing standards. Appendix I presents more details on our
scope and methodology.
^1 Naturalization may be revoked through judicial proceedings instituted
by a U.S. Attorney's Office on the ground that naturalization was
illegally procured or procured by concealment of a material fact or by
willful misrepresentation. 8 U.S.C. S 1451.
Results in Brief
A-files were not available in a relatively small percentage of
naturalization cases. USCIS officials attributed the unavailability of
A-files to staff failure to use its file-tracking system in a timely
fashion or sometimes at all. Although USCIS does not keep track of when
naturalization applications are adjudicated without an A-file, data from
USCIS's database for managing naturalization applications indicated that
A-files were available for 685,000 of the approximately 715,000
naturalization applications--or 96 percent--adjudicated nationwide in
fiscal year 2005, indicating that A-files may not have been used in 30,000
applications. However, USCIS officials said that A-files were probably
used to process some of the 30,000 applications because adjudicators are
not required to indicate in the naturalization database if an A-file was
not used. In addition, USCIS conducted quality assurance audits of a
sample of about 29,000 naturalization cases adjudicated in fiscal year
2005 and found that A-files were not available in 129 cases, less than 1
percent. However because of limitations in USCIS's sampling methodology,
the results of this audit could not be projected to the universe of
applications adjudicated in that fiscal year. Available data can indicate
only a range of how often an A-file was not available (from perhaps as
high as 4 percent of all cases to less than 1 percent). Since USCIS deems
reviewing the A-file critical to the naturalization adjudications process,
the lack of precise data on when an A-file is not available limits USCIS's
ability to determine compliance with this critical step and whether
additional actions are necessary to ensure A-files are available when
needed. USCIS officials also told us that adjudicators sometimes had
difficulty locating A-files because the A-file's location indicated in
NFTS was incorrect or not up to date. For example, an April 2005 file
audit by USCIS's San Diego district office found that nearly 21 percent of
the district's files (11,731 of 56,092 files audited) were not in the
location shown in NFTS. In addition, NFTS procedures require DHS staff
receiving an A-file to "immediately" update the system. During our review,
USCIS checked the NFTS and found over 100,000 A-files were shown to be in
transit more than 30 days. The failure of some staff to update NFTS to
record the movement of an A-file, such as when they receive or transfer
one, is a major reason for delays in locating A-files or in not being able
to locate an A-file at all. As of July 27, 2006, for the 14 district
offices we included in our review, NFTS indicated that about 111,000
A-files were lost. USCIS officials suggested that staff may not be using
NFTS because they may lack training (Web-based training is available) on
how to use the system and that management may not be emphasizing enough
the importance of using NFTS.
^2 See GAO, Immigration Benefits: Improvements Needed to Address Backlogs
and Ensure Quality of Adjudications, [17]GAO-06-20 (Washington, D.C.: Nov.
21, 2005).
Missing A-files can have an impact on the process of adjudicating
naturalization applications in several ways. They can cost staff extra
time and effort trying to locate them. Applicants for naturalization, in
turn, may wait longer for USCIS to process their applications. For
example, USCIS procedures for processing naturalization applications allow
USCIS to wait up to 3 months to try to find an A-file, thereby possibly
delaying adjudicating the application. Because an A-file might contain
potentially disqualifying information about an applicant, adjudicating an
immigration benefit application without an A-file also increases the risk
of granting a benefit to an ineligible applicant. In addition, DHS may not
be able to take an enforcement action against an applicant because the
necessary evidence is in the missing A-file.
USCIS has steps in place to help mitigate the risk of adjudicating a
naturalization application without an A-file. These steps include
verifying the applicant's lawful admission to the United States and
conducting extra supervisory reviews to ensure that naturalization
processing procedures have been followed. Officials we spoke with told us
that they believed these additional steps help mitigate the risk of
adjudicating a naturalization application without an A-file. Available
data indicate that these additional steps are being followed nearly all of
the time. Of the 129 quality assurance audit cases sampled in 2005 where
an A-file was not available, USCIS staff did not follow all of the
required procedures in 5 applications. Officials from several district
offices said that the standard adjudication procedures (applicable whether
or not an A-file is missing), such as background security checks, also
help reduce the risk somewhat of granting naturalization to someone who is
ineligible.
In order to improve USCIS's management information, prevent unnecessary
delay, and more efficiently adjudicate applications, we are recommending
that the Secretary of Homeland Security direct the Director of USCIS to
o require users to record or note whether an A-file was used to
adjudicate a naturalization application and,
o work together with other DHS users of A-files to
o determine the extent to which staff may not be
complying with NFTS procedures for updating the
system and why, and
o correct any identified deficiencies in file
tracking compliance.
We provided a draft of this report to DHS. DHS stated that the report
generally provided a good overview of the complexities associated with the
process for ensuring adjudication officers have A-files when adjudicating
naturalization applications. DHS agreed with both of our recommendations
and cited actions it plans to take to implement them.
Background
Millions of noncitizens apply annually to enter the United States to live,
work, or study. USCIS creates alien files, more commonly called A-files,
to document the history of a person's interaction with USCIS or any DHS
entity involved in immigration related actions. USCIS's Records Operation
Handbook (ROH) provides instruction on when and how to create an A-file as
well as how to request files and transfer them from one office to another.
USCIS maintains A-files on certain individuals, including those who
o are immigrants or who apply for immigrant status,
o have become citizens, or
o have applied for asylum in the United States or refugee status
overseas.
The A-file is to contain all of the relevant documents of an alien's
interactions with USCIS or other DHS components. For example, the A-file
could contain an application for lawful permanent residency and petitions
for an alien relative as well as documents related to enforcement actions
such as an arrest warrant and the results of any immigration proceedings.
While USCIS is the main user of A-files and the official DHS custodian for
all of them, other DHS components, such as ICE and Customs and Border
Protection (CBP), also use A-files for investigations or other enforcement
actions. In addition, information and documents from A-files may be shared
with agencies such as the FBI and Department of State. According to senior
USCIS officials, USCIS spends about $13 million each year transporting
A-files within USCIS and to other components and agencies.^3 USCIS's
long-range plans call for eventually converting paper A-files into
electronic files, thus avoiding these transportation costs and making
A-files available to multiple users simultaneously. In August 2006, USCIS
awarded a 5-year $150 million contract to begin converting A-files.
USCIS adjudicates applications for immigration benefits through a network
of field offices that include 4 service centers, 33 district offices, and
8 asylum offices. In fiscal year 2005, USCIS's budget was about $1.8
billion and USCIS adjudicated about 7.5 million applications, of which
over 715,000 were applications for naturalization. Naturalization
applications are adjudicated at USCIS district offices and require the
applicant to, among other things, undergo a security background check, be
interviewed by an adjudicator and, demonstrate proficiency in English and
a basic understanding of U.S. civics. As part of the adjudications
process, adjudicators are to review the applicant's A-file to identify any
information that may disqualify the applicant for naturalization,
including information that may indicate potential fraud. Of the over
715,000 naturalization applications adjudicated in fiscal year 2005, USCIS
denied about 64,000.
^3 See GAO, Information Technology: Near-Term Effort to Automate
Paper-Based Immigration Files Needs Planning Improvements, [18]GAO-06-375
(Washington, D.C.: Mar. 31, 2006). See also DHS, Office of Inspector
General, USCIS Faces Challenges in Modernizing Information Technology,
OIG-05-41 (Washington, D.C.: September 2005).
All applications for an immigration benefit, including naturalization, are
to be filed in the applicant's A-file. USCIS staff use USCIS's Central
Index System to locate and request the A-file from the last known office
location. However, the Central Index System can only identify the office
location for the A-file; it does not provide precise information about
where in an office an A-file is located. USCIS has NFTS, a system designed
to provide more detailed information on the location of an A-file, down to
a specific individual or file drawer. USCIS's predecessor, the Immigration
and Naturalization Service, began deploying NFTS in November 2002. The
system is now deployed to all records units in USCIS district and asylum
offices, the USCIS's Texas Service Center and National Benefits Center,
and all ICE and CBP units. Tentative plans call for deploying NFTS to
USCIS's three other service centers by March 2007.^4 NFTS is a Web-based
system that is available to anyone in DHS who needs A-files. Users can
obtain a user identification code that allows them to request, receive,
and transfer A-files. Web-based training on how to use NFTS is available
via DHS component intranet sites, including USCIS's EdVanatage Learning
University, ICE's Virtual University, and the CBP Learning University. In
January 2004, USCIS, ICE, and CBP signed a Service Level Agreement in
which USCIS agreed to provide A-files to ICE and CBP, and ICE and CBP
agreed to follow the ROH.
USCIS's ROH describes the procedures that are to be followed for locating,
sending, and receiving A-files. The ROH states that all DHS staff with
access to NFTS should use NFTS to, for example,
o record the creation of an A-file,
o request A-files from other offices,
o record when an A-file is sent or transferred out to another
office, and
o immediately record both when an A-file is received and the
file's specific location.
^4 Staff at the three service centers without NFTS use USCIS's Central
Index System to record when they request, receive, and transfer A-files. A
computer interface between CIS and NFTS updates the A-file movement in
each system so that staff who cannot use NFTS can record the movement of
an A-file. The movement will then be recorded in NFTS and vice versa.
USCIS uses the Computer-Linked Application Information Management System
(CLAIMS) 4, as the case management and tracking system for naturalization
applications. CLAIMS 4 contains information from the naturalization
application and other data, such as the results from security background
checks and whether or not the application was approved. CLAIMS 4 can also
track the status of a request for the A-file, indicating whether the
A-file has been requested, received by the district office adjudicating
the application, or deemed lost. Figure 1 shows the steps involved in
locating A-files for naturalization applications.
Figure 1: Steps Involved in Locating A-files for Naturalization
Applications
USCIS's Adjudicator's Field Manual provides adjudicators with guidance on
naturalization procedures and how to determine whether an applicant meets
the eligibility requirements for becoming a citizen. To improve the
quality and consistency of all naturalization application processing,
USCIS has issued Naturalization Quality Procedures (NQP) guidelines. The
NQP provides detailed checklists that clerical staff and adjudicators must
complete at each stage of the naturalization process. These completed
checklists must be included in an A-file, along with the naturalization
application and related documents. The NQP also requires that adjudicators
be certified as NQP trained once every 3 years.
Extent to Which Naturalization Cases Are Adjudicated without an A-file Appears
Low, but Compliance with File-Tracking Procedures Is Lacking
Our analysis of USCIS data and interviews with USCIS district officials
indicate that A-files are missing in a relatively small percentage of
naturalization cases but that DHS staff may not always be updating NFTS
when files are moved, resulting in delays in locating A-files or in not
locating them at all. The CLAIMS 4 database contains a data field that
indicates the status of the A-file request, such as whether the file has
been received in the district office, requested but not yet received, or
that the A-file has been declared lost. According to data from the CLAIMS
4 database, of the approximately 715,000 naturalization applications
adjudicated in fiscal year 2005, the district office received the A-file
in 685,000 of these cases (about 96 percent), indicating that A-files may
not have been available in about 4 percent (about 30,000) of them.
However, USCIS officials told us that this CLAIMS 4 data field is an
optional field that USCIS staff may complete at various times during the
adjudications process or not at all. USCIS officials told us that of the
approximately 30,000 naturalization cases where the A-file status
indicated something other than received in the district office, A-files
were probably available in a number of them. However, because adjudicators
may not always update the A-file data field to indicate whether the A-file
was eventually received, how many is unknown. In about 13,000 of the
approximately 30,000 cases, the A-file status indicator was blank.
Data from USCIS's quality assurance audit of the naturalization program
also indicate that the A-files are missing in a relatively small
percentage of cases. In fiscal year 2005, the USCIS Performance Management
Division sampled 28,575 naturalization applications adjudicated by
district offices. Staff found that A-files were available in all but 129
of 28,575 cases sampled, about 0.5 percent. However, because of
limitations in its sampling methodology, USCIS said this percentage cannot
be projected to the universe of approximately 715,000 naturalization
applications completed that year. Although USCIS officials from the 13
district offices we spoke with acknowledged that their offices do not
track how often naturalization applications are adjudicated without an
A-file, they believed the percentage was low. They estimated the
percentage of naturalization applications in fiscal year 2005 that were
adjudicated without A-files ranged from less than 1 percent to 10 percent.
GAO's Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government states that
information needed to achieve an agency's objectives should be identified
and regularly reported to management.^5 According to USCIS's
Naturalization Quality Procedures, having and reviewing an applicant's
A-file is critical to confirming that the applicant is eligible for
naturalization and that no incidents have taken place that would
disqualify the applicant from naturalization. In a November 2005 memo, the
Acting USCIS Director of Domestic Operations stated that not having an
A-file should be a "rare" occurrence, but did not quantify what "rare"
meant. Since USCIS deems reviewing the A-file critical to the
naturalization adjudications process, the lack of precise data on when an
A-file is not available limits USCIS's ability to determine compliance
with this critical step and whether additional actions are necessary to
ensure A-files are available when needed.
According to USCIS officials, adjudicators sometimes have difficulty
locating A-files or cannot find them at all because the locations shown in
NFTS are incorrect or not up to date. For example, according to a summary
of the results of an April 2005 file audit conducted by USCIS's San Diego
district office records staff, nearly 21 percent of the district's files
(11,731 of 56,092 files audited) were not in the location shown in NFTS.
Another 34,764 files shown to be under the control of the San Diego
district could not be immediately located during the audit. Some of these
files may have been in locked file cabinets that audit staff could not
access, while others may have been transferred to another location and
were no longer in the district. NFTS showed duplicate file locations for
464 files. Audit staff also found 281 of the files that NFTS indicated
were lost. About half of the lost files were found within the local ICE
Office of Investigations. The other half were found mostly within CBP. In
addition, in June 2006 the Los Angeles district office conducted a file
audit of three locations that had files. As shown in table 1, about 6
percent of the files indicated by NFTS to be at these three locations
could not be found.
^5 GAO, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government,
[19]GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1 (Washington, D.C.: November 1999).
Table 1: Results from Los Angeles District File Audit for Three Locations
Number Percent
Files shown in NFTS 4,169 100
Files in location shown in NFTS 3,886 93
Files not in location shown in NFTS 283 7
Files located after physical search 36 1
Files not found 247 6
Source: GAO analysis of USCIS data.
For some A-files, the office location recorded in NFTS is not up to date.
NFTS procedures require that a person receiving an A-file should
"immediately" update NFTS. According to the Section Chief of the Records
Systems Services Section of USCIS's Office of Records Management Branch,
once a file is sent (either via the U.S. Postal Service or a private
package delivery service) from one office to another, it should take no
longer than a month for the A-file to arrive at the receiving office and
for NFTS to be updated. During our review, USCIS checked NFTS and found
107,000 A-files that have been in transit over a month but had yet to be
recorded as received in NFTS. Nearly 63,000 had been in transit more than
3 months.
GAO's Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government also states
that transactions and other significant events should be promptly recorded
so that they maintain their relevance, value, and usefulness to management
in controlling operations and making decisions. Although USCIS considers
compliance with NFTS procedures critical to enabling it to maintain
control over A-files, DHS staff are not always complying with these
procedures.
According to USCIS officials, DHS staff are not always recording the
movement of an A-file in NFTS, resulting in inaccurate information on the
location of A-files. Officials from 10 of the 13 USCIS district offices we
spoke with claim that the failure to record the movement of files in NFTS
is a major reason for delays in locating an A-file, in not being able to
locate an A-file at all, and in an A-file being declared lost. One
district director stated that the cooperation of other DHS components in
adhering to file transfer procedures was imperative, especially since they
maintained A-files relating to national security investigations and other
sensitive issues. According to USCIS records officials, the USCIS Records
Division has not conducted a formal study or evaluation as to why NFTS
users are not complying with all NFTS and ROH procedures. This cooperation
is important, especially because USCIS has no authority to enforce
compliance with file-tracking procedures among the other DHS components.
The report summarizing the San Diego district's April 2005 file audit
cited above stated that the number of files, in the thousands, that were
not in the location shown in NFTS or could not be found was "staggering"
and attested to the need to ensure that all personnel in all units and
agencies use NFTS and follow procedures. According to the report, several
locations were not using NFTS although NFTS was available. USCIS records
officials stated that lack of compliance with NFTS procedures was "very
prevalent." As of July 27, 2006, for the 14 district offices we included
in our review, NFTS indicated that about 111,000 A-files were lost.
USCIS officials offered several reasons why some staff may not be
complying with NFTS file-tracking procedures. According to the report
summarizing the San Diego district's April 2005 file audit, additional
NFTS training is needed and compliance with the NFTS procedures should be
mandated for all sites. The audit report recommended regular NFTS
workshops for USCIS, CBP, and ICE staff. USCIS records officials stated
that local management may not be emphasizing enough the importance of
using NFTS. ICE officials we spoke to commented that they believe some of
the NFTS file transfer procedures are cumbersome, resulting in some ICE
staff circumventing them and not recording the file movement in NFTS. For
example, whether sending or receiving A-files, the ROH requires that they
all be routed through the local USCIS records unit whenever a file needs
to be transferred from one ICE field location to another. This is because
members of USCIS staff are the only ones allowed to transfer a file from
one field location to another. However, according to ICE officials,
because of the urgency of the situation, ICE personnel may send an A-file
directly from one ICE office to another, bypassing the USCIS records
units. As a result, the file movement to the new location is not recorded
in NFTS. USCIS records officials stated that they do not believe lack of
compliance stems from any technical problems with using NFTS because the
system is Web-based and relatively easy to use.
Missing A-files Can Affect the Naturalization Adjudication Process in Several
Ways
Missing A-files can cause delays in awarding immigration benefits, hinder
USCIS's ability to uncover immigration fraud, and limit DHS's ability to
take enforcement actions. According to USCIS's ROH, lost or missing
A-files can cause delays or errors in awarding immigration benefits and
can hamper investigation and enforcement actions. For example, USCIS
procedures for processing naturalization applications allow USCIS to wait
up to 3 months to try to find an A-file, thereby delaying adjudicating the
application. According to several USCIS district officials, USCIS staff
spend additional time and effort trying to locate files that are not in
the location identified in NFTS, thus delaying their ability to process
benefits quickly. Officials from all of the district offices we spoke with
told us that USCIS faces an increased risk of granting naturalization to
an ineligible applicant when the adjudicator does not have the A-file
available because the file may contain potentially disqualifying
information. Officials from several district offices stated that the
A-file is needed to look for any inconsistencies between the
naturalization application and other applications that the applicant had
submitted when applying for previous benefits like legal permanent
residency. For example, a naturalization application may contain facts
about the applicant's marital or family (children) status that are
inconsistent with information in the A-file, a possible indication of
fraud that may not be uncovered without the A-file. These types of
inconsistencies cannot be checked without the A-file. In addition, USCIS
conducts background security checks on all naturalization applicants via
the Interagency Border Inspection System (IBIS).^6 IBIS guidance requires
an IBIS name check on all names an applicant may have used. According to
several district officials, the A-file may contain other names (aliases)
the applicant may have used that should be checked against IBIS.
Therefore, without the A-file, any potentially damaging information
related to these other names may not be uncovered, increasing the risk of
granting naturalization to an ineligible applicant. DHS's ability to take
an enforcement action against an applicant may also be compromised.
According to an ICE attorney, some immigration judges may be reluctant to,
for example, order an alien removed from the United States without the
complete A-file.
^6 IBIS provides the law enforcement community with access to
computer-based enforcement files of common interest and also provides
access to the FBI's National Crime Information Center (NCIC).
Naturalization Quality Procedures Help to Mitigate the Risk of Adjudicating a
Naturalization Application without an A-file
Officials we spoke with stated that the steps contained in the
Naturalization Quality Procedures mitigate somewhat the risk of
naturalizing someone who is ineligible. For example, adjudicators must
take additional steps when adjudicating a naturalization application
without an A-file. Specifically, these steps include
o verifying the applicant's lawful admission to the United States
and that the applicant has lived in the United States as a lawful
permanent resident for the required amount of time--generally, 5
years--and lack of disqualifying information in USCIS databases,
o extra supervisory reviews to ensure that naturalization
processing procedures have been followed, and
o not scheduling the oath ceremony on the same day that the
naturalization application is adjudicated to allow sufficient time
for the required supervisory reviews.
Data from USCIS's quality assurance audit of the naturalization program
indicate that USCIS staff is following procedures nearly all of the time
when adjudicating a naturalization application without an A-file. Of the
129 quality assurance audit cases sampled in fiscal year 2005 where an
A-file was not available, USCIS staff did not follow all of the required
procedures in 5 cases.
Officials from several district offices told us that the standard
naturalization adjudication procedures (applicable when an A-file is
either available or missing), such as background security checks, somewhat
reduce the risk of granting naturalization to someone who is ineligible.
For example, as part of USCIS's background security check, USCIS is to
conduct an IBIS name check as well as both a fingerprint and FBI name
check. In an April 2006 memorandum, the USCIS Director of Operations
directed that naturalization interviews should not be scheduled until all
background checks have been completed to ensure that all background
security issues are resolved before USCIS interviews the applicant.
According to officials from several district offices, the background
security checks mitigate, somewhat, the risk of naturalizing someone who
poses a potential national security or public safety threat.
Conclusions
Although USCIS deems having an A-file critical to adjudicating a
naturalization application, USCIS staff are not required to record whether
an A-file was used to adjudicate a naturalization application. Recording
whether an A-file was used to adjudicate a naturalization application
could help USCIS assess the extent of the risk posed by adjudicating
naturalization applications without an A-file and what actions may be
necessary to address the problem. DHS staff who have access to A-files may
not be consistently using NFTS to track the movement of A-files, hindering
the ability to locate A-files when needed. While officials offered
suggestions as to why staff may not be complying, such as the lack of NFTS
training, it is unclear to what extent staff are not complying and why.
Knowing the extent to which staff are not complying and why and addressing
these reasons would increase DHS's ability to locate and provide A-files
for adjudicators and others, thereby reducing the risk associated with
adjudicating a naturalization application and other immigration benefits
without the A-file.
Recommendations for Executive Action
In order to improve USCIS's management information, prevent unnecessary
delay, and more efficiently adjudicate applications, we are recommending
that the Secretary of Homeland Security direct the Director of USCIS to
o require users to record or note whether an A-file was used to
adjudicate a naturalization application and
o work together with other DHS users of A-files to
o determine the extent to which staff may not be
complying with NFTS procedures for updating the
system and why and
o correct any identified deficiencies in
file-tracking compliance.
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation
We provided a draft of this report to DHS for review. On October 24, 2006
DHS provided written comments which are shown in appendix II. DHS also
provided technical comments which we incorporated as appropriate. DHS
agreed with both of our recommendations and stated that the report
generally provides a good overview of the complexities associated with the
process for ensuring adjudication officers have A-files when adjudicating
naturalization applications.
Regarding our recommendation to require users to record or note whether an
A-file was used to adjudicate a naturalization application, DHS stated
that it plans to modify its CLAIMS 4 system to make the data field related
to file status mandatory. USCIS plans to make this modification in early
to mid 2007.
Regarding our recommendation that USCIS work together with other DHS users
of A-files to determine the extent to which staff may not be complying
with NFTS procedures and why and to correct any deficiencies in
file-tracking procedures, DHS stated that information obtained from
recently completed visits to USCIS, CBP and ICE field offices will help
USCIS determine the level of compliance with file tracking procedures and
identify remediation efforts required by each agency. This information
will also serve as the basis for a planned joint policy on A-file
management. DHS also cited several efforts it has taken or is planning to
take to improve the management of A-files. For example, USCIS and CBP
records managers have formed a partnership and are working to improve
responsiveness to records management needs. USCIS established File Control
Offices at several sub-offices allowing these sub-offices to move files to
requesting offices as quickly as possible. USCIS' Records Management
Branch will evaluate NFTS reports to track files that are not transferred
within a reasonable amount of time and notify appropriate components to
ensure compliance with policies and procedures. USCIS will continue
on-site training as NFTS continues to be deployed across DHS.
As arranged with your offices, unless you publicly announce its contents
earlier, we plan no further distribution of this report until 30 days
after its issue date. At that time, we will send copies of this report to
the Secretary of the Department of Homeland of Security and other
interested congressional committees. We will also make copies available to
others upon request. In addition, the report will be available at no
charge on GAO's Web site at http://www.gao.gov .
If you or your staff have any questions about this report or wish to
discuss it further, please contact me at (202) 512-8777 or by e-mail at
[email protected] . Contact points for our Offices of Congressional
Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this report.
Key contributors to this report are listed in appendix III.
Sincerely yours,
Paul L. Jones, Director, Homeland Security and Justice Issues
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology
To address all of our objectives, we interviewed United States Citizenship
and Immigration Services (USCIS) headquarters officials, reviewed relevant
documents, and sent e-mail questionnaires and followed up with phone calls
to officials and staff from 13 (Chicago, Dallas, Detroit, Houston, Los
Angeles, Miami, Newark, New York City, Philadelphia, San Diego, San
Francisco, Seattle and Washington, D.C.) of USCIS's 33 district offices.
We obtained written responses to our questionnaire from another district
office (Boston). We selected these offices because they adjudicated most
of the naturalization applications. Specifically, USCIS data indicate that
these 14 offices adjudicated nearly two-thirds, or about 497,000, of the
approximately 715,000 naturalization applications adjudicated in fiscal
year 2005. In addition, to examine the extent to which USCIS records how
often naturalization applications are adjudicated without an A-file, as
well as the reasons why an A-file might be missing and what steps USCIS
takes to compensate for any lack of an A-file during an adjudication
process we obtained data related to
o naturalization applications adjudicated in fiscal year 2005
contained in the Computer-Linked Application Information
Management System (CLAIMS) 4 database that records information
from the naturalization application and related information,
o the results from USCIS quality assurance audits of a sample of
naturalization applications reviewed in fiscal year 2005, and
o A-files indicated as lost and, as having been in transit and yet
to be recorded as received in USCIS's National File Tracking
System (NFTS).
We also reviewed policies and procedures related to processing
naturalization applications and instructions and guidance about using,
locating, and requesting A-files. In a prior review, we determined how
USCIS ensures the quality and consistency of adjudicator decisions by
reviewing USCIS reports and data on accuracy rates related to its two
quality assurance programs, interviewing USCIS officials in the
Performance Management Division, reviewing the findings and
recommendations of an independent study on USCIS's quality assurance
programs and, discussing supervisory review practices with senior managers
at the field offices we visited. However, we did not independently verify
the extent and quality of supervisory review. ^1
^1 See [22]GAO-06-20 .
We assessed the reliability of CLAIMS 4 and NFTS data by (1) reviewing
summary data and specific data elements for obvious errors in accuracy and
completeness, (2) reviewing related documentation, and (3) interviewing
USCIS staff knowledgeable about the CLAIMS 4 and NFTS systems. For NFTS,
we also observed how A-files are located, transferred, and received.
However, we did not independently evaluate whether technical malfunctions
may be a factor in the number of files with improperly identified
locations, although we have no reason to believe that technical
malfunctions have occurred. We found that information and summaries of the
NFTS, CLAIMS 4, and quality assurance data were sufficiently reliable for
the purposes of this report. We conducted our review from August 2005
through August 2006 in accordance with generally accepted government
auditing standards.
Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Homeland Security
Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
GAO Contact
Paul L. Jones, (202) 512-8777
Staff Acknowledgments
In addition to the above, Michael Dino, Assistant Director; Richard
Ascarate; Jenny Chanley; Frances Cook; Carlos Garcia; Julian King; and
Brian Lipman were key contributors to this report.
(440430)
GAO's Mission
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its
constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and
accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO
examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies;
and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help
Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's
commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of
accountability, integrity, and reliability.
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost
is through GAO's Web site ( www.gao.gov ). Each weekday, GAO posts
newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To
have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go to
www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to Updates."
Order by Mail or Phone
The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of
Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or more
copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders should
be sent to:
U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM Washington,
D.C. 20548
To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 TDD: (202) 512-2537 Fax: (202)
512-6061
To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs
Contact:
Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm E-mail:
[email protected] Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202)
512-7470
Congressional Relations
Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, [email protected] (202) 512-4400 U.S.
Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 Washington,
D.C. 20548
Public Affairs
Paul Anderson, Managing Director, [email protected] (202) 512-4800
U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149
Washington, D.C. 20548
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-85 .
To view the full product, including the scope
and methodology, click on the link above.
For more information, contact Paul Jones at (202) 512-8777 or
[email protected].
Highlights of [30]GAO-07-85 , a report to congressional requesters
October 2006
IMMIGRATION BENEFITS
Additional Efforts Needed to Help Ensure Alien Files Are Located when
Needed
A-files were not available to adjudicate naturalization applications in a
small percentage of cases. GAO found that of the naturalization
applications adjudicated in 2005, about 30,000--or about 4 percent of
them--may have been adjudicated without A-files. However, this number may
be less because USCIS staff are not required to record whether an A-file
was available. USCIS officials said that a major reason A-files were not
available for naturalization application adjudications is that staff are
not using the automated file-tracking system. USCIS officials suggested
that staff might not be using the automated file-tracking system for lack
of sufficient training on how to use the system, while local management
may not be adequately emphasizing the importance of complying with A-file
tracking policies and procedures.
Missing A-files can have an impact on the process of adjudicating
naturalization applications in several ways. For example, when an A-file
is not available at the location indicated in the automated file-tracking
system, additional time is spent trying to locate the file, which slows
the adjudication process and applicants may wait longer for USCIS to
process their application. In addition, missing A-files can hinder USCIS'
s ability to uncover immigration benefit fraud and limit DHS' ability to
take enforcement actions.
USCIS has steps in place to help mitigate the risk of adjudicating a
naturalization application without an A-file. These steps include
verifying the applicant's lawful admission to the United States and
conducting extra supervisory reviews to ensure that naturalization
processing procedures have been followed.
Additional Time Spent Locating A-files when A-files Are Not Initially
Received at USCIS District Offices
To document the interactions of aliens with the Department of Homeland
Security's (DHS) United States Citizenship and Immigration Services
(USCIS) and other government entities, USCIS creates alien files, or
A-files. While deemed critical, especially in making citizenship
decisions, A-files are sometimes missing during adjudications. In 2002,
naturalization was granted to an alien whose A-file was missing and who
was later found to be associated with a terrorist organization. GAO
focused its review on (1) how often USCIS adjudicates naturalization
applications without an A-file and why, (2) the effect that missing
A-files can have on the adjudication process, and (3) steps taken to help
mitigate the risk of missing A-files. To address these questions, GAO
interviewed officials and staff from USCIS and reviewed relevant data,
policies, and procedures related to processing naturalization applications
and the automated file-tracking system DHS established to track the
movement of A-files.
[31]What GAO Recommends
GAO recommends that USCIS require adjudicators to record whether an A-file
was available in naturalization adjudications and, with other DHS users of
A-files, determine why staff are not complying with file-tracking
procedures and correct any deficiencies. In its comments, DHS agreed with
our recommendations.
References
Visible links
17. http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-20
18. http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-375
19. http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1
22. http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-20
30. http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-85
*** End of document. ***