Archive for the ‘government’ Category
Posted by Christopher Coen on May 10, 2012
An Iraqi refugee family now living in Idaho says that they were told, on the day before travel to the US for resettlement, that they should come in to “sign” for tickets. At the signing they claim they were then told to sign for a $4,500 travel loan. I wrote to the State Department about my concerns about the refugee Travel Loan Program program in 2005, but the agency’s refugee office did not make any major changes until now. In March the State Department announced that it was planning significant changes to the refugee program beginning in October (the beginning of the next fiscal year). A State Department spokeswoman says monthly loan payments will be capped according to income, loan agreements will be translated into nearly a dozen languages, and there will be a new informational website explaining the travel loan program. An article at StateImpact explains:
…[Qusay Alani] says he left Iraq after he was jailed for refusing to join Saddam Hussein’s Baath Party. In Jordan, he says, he lived like a fugitive. As more and more Iraqis fled there, they were less and less welcome. Alani began the process of applying for refugee status. He didn’t aim to come to the U.S. He and his family simply needed to go somewhere. “Any country, I go to,” he says. “The only thing is just to protect my family. Because, you know, if I go back to Iraq I might get killed, you know. So – do my family.”
In 2009, after years of waiting, Alani and his family learned they were bound for the United States. This is where the travel loan comes in.
“They gave us like a month prior,” Alani explains. “They told us – in a month ahead, you’re going to travel. Then a day before, they told us to come and sign for your tickets.”
Alani says that’s when he found out he would have to sign a loan for more than $4,500…
…there is an effort underway to make changes, says Deborah Sisbarro, a spokeswoman for the State Department’s Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration.
“We are, in fact, in the process of making improvements in the way the travel loan program works, yes,” she says.
Sisbarro says there will be a new informational website explaining the travel loan program. She says monthly loan payments will be capped according to income, and loan agreements will be translated into nearly a dozen languages. She says the changes should be in place by next year…
…In reporting this story, StateImpact requested interviews with current and former State Department officials and the official who oversees the travel loan program. None was available for an interview… Read more here
In the article the IRC’s Jim Carey complains about the travel loan program, yet his organization offers no private partner solution to the problem. Couldn’t the nine national resettlement agencies offer to set up a private endowment to help the refugees with part of the cost of travel?
Posted in Idaho, Iraqi, Travel Loan Program | Tagged: refugees, resettlement, State Department, Travel Loan, US Department of State | Leave a Comment »
Posted by Christopher Coen on May 6, 2012
Last summer three Eritrean refugees were arrested after they tried to board an airplane, at Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport going to Des Moines, with a carry-on bag that contained a broken cellphone taped to a tin of helva (a sesame-paste-based food flavored with vanilla). The charges? Having a “hoax device” and “conspiracy” to obtain a hoax device. The three tried to explain that they were just trying to take candy and the old phone to friends. Authorities claimed, however – via questionable reasoning – that the three were attempting to do a trial run to see if they could get a “real bomb” through security, since this was assuredly not a real bomb (helva is not explosive, nor were there any fake wires or a fake detonation device attached). The authorities also deemed suspicious the three traveling in the month of August, being so close to the tenth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, you see – and besides, everyone knows that cell phones are used to detonate bombs. Surely the refugees must have carried aboard a broken cell phone during this “dry run” to fool authorities into thinking that it could not be used to trigger a detonator. But what about that tin of helva, that was suspicious wasn’t it? Well, helva it turns out is an Eritrean ethnic food. Maybe they were trying to trick authorities into thinking the helva was not suspicious since Eritreans are known to eat helva. Plus, some might say it would be nitpicking to point out that federal agents, in first contacts with the Eritrean refugees, used an interpreter that did not speak their Kunama language, thus leading to faulty linguistic interpretations.
Now the three are trying to overcome the false “terrorist” label affixed to them in public opinion. This smear is now an obstacle to employment, nine months later, and months after all charges were suddenly dropped. An article in The Arizona Republic looks at the aftermath of the false charges:
Civil war drove Shullu Gorado from his home in Eritrea, a small country on the Horn of Africa, and landed him — like most Kunama — in a refugee camp in neighboring Ethiopia.
Ethiopia was no kinder to the refugees than their war-torn homeland, but the United States welcomed the Kunama people, promising safety and the opportunity for a new life to the former farmers and shepherds. In four years,Gorado rose steadily through the ranks at a local supermarket, stashing away savings and taking general-education and English-language classes as he worked toward a new future in a new country.
But after being arrested on suspicion of plotting to sneak a hoax explosive device through airport security, serving two months in a federal detention facility, then having the charges against him dropped in December, Gorado and Asa Shani are branded as terrorists in the eyes of many. Among those viewing them with suspicion, they say, are prospective employers who need only perform a perfunctory Internet search to find coverage of their arrests… Read more here
Posted in Eritrean, FBI, Phoenix, police, security/terrorism | Tagged: bomb, Eritrean, false charges, FBI, helva, Phoenix, refugees, resettlement, terrorism | 1 Comment »
Posted by Christopher Coen on May 5, 2012
The mayor of Lynn, MA is putting out alerts about the fiscal pressure experienced by schools in her city, apparently due to refugee secondary migration. Secondary migration is refugees leaving the city they were initially settled in and, under their own volition, going elsewhere due to a whole number of reasons, e.g. to be near friends and relatives, to find a place that has more or higher paying jobs, to seek a less alien climate, to move to a place with a larger community of people from their ethnic group and/or group of national of origin, etc. The main problem here I think is that federal funds are insufficient to help schools impacted by refugee arrivals – the Office of Refugee Resettlement’s grant, known as the Refugee School Impact Program, doesn’t come close to meeting needs.
An article in The Daily News explains some basic details of the problem in Lynn, although it also shows that the mayor is taking a winding and confused course through government channels, even going to the UNHCR, and gets facts wrong about several of the federal agencies:
…[Mayor Judith Flanagan Kennedy's Chief of Staff, Jamie Cerulli] said after getting bounced from office to office she finally spoke to Barbara Day with the state department’s office of Refugee Resettlement Administration for Children and Families.
“She said for Fiscal Year 2011 they approved 25 refugees to come to the Lynn area,” Cerulli said. “She also said in 2012 it looks like there is approval for 28 … but that’s such a small number. If they’re not coming from there then where are they coming from?”
Cerulli said Day noted that if immigrants already have family in the area they are more likely to gravitate to the same area. Day was not available Thursday for comment and calls to the U.S. State Department of Health and Human Services were not immediately returned.
Cerulli said she plans to keep digging at the federal and state level to try and determine if Lynn has been officially deemed a haven city while also trying to determine exactly what drives immigrants to Lynn.
Kennedy has always emphasized her administration has gone the extra step to celebrate the ethnic diversity and welcome immigrants to the city and she said she would never deny a child or its family services… Read more here
Posted in Boston, capacity, children, funding, language, Office of Admissions, ORR, school for refugee children, schools, secondary migration, refugee, UN (United Nations) | Tagged: Barbara Day, Judith Flanagan Kennedy, Lynn MA, Office of Refugee Resettlement, ORR, Refugee School Impact Program, refugees, resettlement, schools, secondary migration | Leave a Comment »
Posted by Christopher Coen on May 4, 2012
Young Cambodians, mainly men, who came to the United States as infants and refugees, and were resettled in some of America’s worst gang infested neighborhoods, are now being deported due to felonies for which they have already served their time. Those who have atoned for their past crimes and are living as productive members of American society have no right to show a judge evidence of this or appeal their deportations. A video at YouTube explains their story:
One of the untold stories of the current immigration hysteria sweeping America is the forced deportation of young Cambodians, mainly men, who came to the United States as infants and refugees after escaping the Khmer Rouge genocide, civil war and illegal US invasion and bombings of Cambodia. Their families, poor, uneducated farmers for the most part, were dumped in some of America’s worst gang infested neighborhoods. Even though they had ‘permanent resident’ status, felony convictions, some more than 10 years old, means under new immigration rules they are being sent back to a country they do not know, where they have no family and little hope of escaping poverty. Even after serving time and paying back their debt to society, over 1500 Cambodians, some as old as 70 years, are being punished a second time and thrown into ICE jails with no right to appeal.
Over 200 have already arrived in Cambodia, leaving behind families, wives and children in the US. The deportees have no right to appeal, no right to see a judge to show that they have atoned for their past crimes and are living as productive members of American society. Considering America’s role in the turmoil that swept through Cambodia in the 1970s, we are breaking the faith with these refugees. Watch video here
By the way, if any of these young men had pursued their right to apply for citizenship, and had attained it, then they would not have been subject to deportation. Parents and resettlement agencies should help with this.
Posted in Cambodian, dangerous neighborhoods, ICE, Los Angeles, Oakland | Tagged: cambodian, deportation, gangs, ICE, Lost Boys, Lost Boyz, refugees, resettlement | 1 Comment »
Posted by Christopher Coen on May 3, 2012
In late 2009 and early 2010 a volunteer assisting refugees at the Bowling Green International Center (previously known as Western Kentucky Refugee Mutual Assistance Association) found refugees from Myanmar (in this case Karenni) living in deplorable conditions, who reported receiving low-quality resettlement services from the resettlement agency. The volunteer documented extensively what she saw and heard, including taking photos and videos. Oddly, a State Department resettlement grant inspection report from earlier in 2009 failed to uncover any of these problems.
Now, here is a look at the ORR’s most recent inspection report of the International Center’s (IC’s) use of Matching Grant Program funds, from 2006. By the way, this is one of twelve inspection reports (8 were incomplete) that we recently received from a Freedom of Information Act request to the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) covering a period from 2005 to 2011. (If HHS complied with the FOIA law, that would mean that the ORR did two inspections per year. This, in a program that in CY2006, for example, paid out $35,772,000 to the resettlement contractors, and served 24,753 refugees, Cuban/Haitian Entrants, asylees and victims of trafficking)
Here are highlights from the inspection:
- The IC’s national affiliate, the USCRI, supposedly monitored the IC in March of 2006 (these are the self-inspections that the State Dept. touts as being useful — I remain skeptical). “ORR requested a copy of this report for the record, but USCRI failed to comply.”
- Of the 67 refugees enrolled in the MG program in 2005, the ORR reviewed only eight refugee case files. Files contained document forms in other languages that did not have a corresponding English copy. Comprehensive employment services were in some cases not documented as required by MG Guidelines. In some cases there was no documentation of closeout, e.g. status of refugee at termination of services and referrals to later programs if needed. The ORR reviewer found that the full issues that had arisen in refugee cases — the resulting services and/or follow-up for some cases — were not noted, and were instead learned only by speaking with the refugees (visiting with only three of the 67 refugees) and resettlement agency staff.
- The IC referred the vast majority of refugees to only one factory that it had a long, established relationship with, disregarding the diversity of refugees’ employment histories and education. (One size does not fit all.)
- Instances where the IC did not pay the children’s part of the monthly cash payments – $40 per child. This is the cash that the ORR gives to resettlement agencies for refugee parents who are receiving employment services so that they are able to pay basic bills.
- Although resettlement agencies such as the IC are allowed to use $2 in MG funds for each $1 in donations they gather, the ORR review found “numerous instances in which copious amounts of inappropriate and unallowable donations were being recorded and counted as MG match. Examples include $1,639 for clothing donations to [match the MG funds] a family of three…and $3,319 for clothing donations for a family of six…unclear service donations of $192 (I suspect that should be four digits — a piece here is redacted)…and counting donations that are clearly required as part of the [State Department refugee grant] (Mattresses [for one refugee] and pillows, sheets, mattresses, etc. for [another refugee] as MG match. The reviewer…found that donated goods were not…consistently valued in a manner that assigns reasonable values to such donations.”
- The IC intermingled funds from separate grants, even from separate US federal agencies, which the ORR assessed as “grossly incompliant” (sic). For example, the reviewer found “numerous instances where [IC] was incorrectly charging federal funds for employee time. ORR Matching Grant, ORR Cash Assistance, ORR Medical Assistance, ORR…Social Services, and [State Department initial resettlement services grant money] charges were often mixed up.” This included double charging case management services to the MG program and to another grant though the refugee was only enrolled in the MG program, charging refugee health costs to MG, and charging MG past the allowable service period.
- Despite these deficiencies the ORR wrote that the International Center provides “effective services to refugees that are enrolled in the MG program” (???), and that the number of refugees enrolled in the MG program was projected to increase from 67 in 2005 to 175 in 2006. The ORR’s specific assessment of the IC’s use of MG program grant money also appears to give the agency credit for non-MG services. For example, the ORR gives the IC credit for services such as referring refugees in a timely manner to food stamps, medical assistance, health screenings and social security cards – all of which the State Department refugee resettlement grant covered. Read report here
Posted in Bowling Green, children, employment services, employment/jobs for refugees, International Center in Bowling Green (Western Kentucky Refugee Mutual Assistance Association), Karenni, Matching Grant program, ORR, USCRI | Tagged: Bowling Green, government contractor, International Center, karenni, Matching grant, One size fits all, ORR, refugees, resettlement, Western Kentucky Refugee Mutual Assistance Association | Leave a Comment »
Posted by Christopher Coen on May 1, 2012
Below is a comment that a regular reader of this blog submitted for today’s State Department public hearing on the size and scope of the refugee program for fiscal year 2013:
I am a private citizen refugee advocate who has been assisting refugees with resettlement issues for the past three years. My comments are based on my experience helping refugees after they arrive in the United States with two exceptions: (1) It shouldn’t be as hard as it appears to be logistically for refugees to go through the process to enter the U.S. . By that I mean, not that each individual shouldn’t be scrutinized in detail, but that the process should entail the least travel through dangerous areas in their home countries, the fewest return trips to an application center, the most feedback about application status, the fewest repeat requests for information, and the speediest answer about whether refugee status will be granted. (2) The travel loan program should be converted to a travel grant program. There seems to be some sort of philosophy that it is citizen-building to saddle a refugee with debt as his/her first exposure to life in the United States. I disagree…It is regularly and repeatedly emphasized to them that failure to repay the travel loan can jeopardize their ability to get U.S. citizenship because of an adverse credit report – yet they are all too often given no information about how to seek forgiveness of a loan many of them will likely never be able to repay in time because of their personal situations. Furthermore, I think having the resettlement agencies act as collection agents for these loans is a significant conflict of interest…
My remaining comments concern my experience during the course of my activities as a refugee advocate…Resettlement agency failures to meet contracted responsibilities are not isolated incidences but are regular, daily occurrences on a widespread basis. I believe these failures occur not because of lack of resources, although that is surely true in some cases, but primarily because of a lack of leadership. Leadership in the local affiliates, leadership in the national offices of resettlement agencies, and leadership in the Domestic Resettlement Section. The failure of leadership that talks to each other more than to refugees. Leadership that cares more about what Washington thinks than what refugees think…I have encountered exactly two offices serving refugees in which a human actually answered the telephone; my experience instead has been full of voice mail not returned and even voice mail boxes completely full – this by agencies who are serving people who may not even have used a telephone before coming to the U.S. Leadership, such as that at World Relief, who cares more about its employees’ religious qualifications than their actual competence. Leadership that does not put enough of its own cash into a resettlement program but instead phonies up the value of its match (the value of which, I believe, is rarely, if ever, audited…English language instruction, crucial, of course, for new arrivals, is regularly inadequate and irrelevant to what a new arrival needs. Referrals for mental health services are regularly inadequate or nonexistent. Housing placements are regularly in dangerous neighborhoods and/or too expensive for the refugee to sustain after financial support stops. Too often refugees are completely abandoned after the initial six months placement…Too often the minimum contractually-required services are not adequately provided or not provided at all. Too often refugees become homeless…There are few people in responsible positions who have the personal and professional competence to install effective programs, who care whether their subcontractors perform well, who care whether their employees serve their clients well, who blame themselves and not their clients when things are not working well…
Particularly disappointing is the leadership of the Domestic Resettlement Section who appears to be more apologist for and defender of resettlement agencies and their local affiliates no matter what rather than the overseers and refugee advocates they should be. Complaints go unanswered; or, if answered, are answered with the condescension of a parent who knows best and must be trusted to do the right thing. Investigation may be promised but one never knows whether it happens and what the result is because that would be a violation of confidentiality. All I know is that what I complained about did not appear to change…Program audits are too infrequent and do not appear to include audits of financial responsibility…Particularly disappointing is that the Domestic Resettlement Section seems to think all is well and nothing needs to change – at least nothing they care to share with the public…
Here is a link to a documentary about refugees in Buffalo, N.Y. I think you’ll find their indomitable spirits despite all that has happened to them is most inspiring. I also recommend the press kit that is posted on the web site for an insight as to how resettlement agencies in Buffalo inspired the making of this film. Read full letter here
Posted in capacity, dangerous neighborhoods, democracy, language interpretation/translation, lack of, Office of Admissions, openess and transparency in government, RPC (Refugee Processing Center), SIV (Special Immigrant Visa) immigrants, State Department, Travel Loan Program, volunteers, World Relief | Tagged: Advocate, comment, Domestic Resettlement Section, FY2013, public hearing, refugees, resettlement, RPC (Refugee Processing Center), State Department, US Department of State | 1 Comment »
Posted by Christopher Coen on April 30, 2012
The said purpose of the Office of Refugee Resettlement’s (ORR’s) Matching Grant Program (MG) is to place refugee clients in jobs which will enable their household units to meet self-sufficiency within 120 to 180 days (in this case “self-sufficiency” is defined as not accessing public cash assistance, although the household units may use other forms of welfare, e.g. SNAP/food stamps, Section 8 housing assistance, etc.). The MG supposedly works to speed up the process of self-sufficiency by offering programs, support, and incentives to refugees, making the transition to self-sufficiency faster and easier. Its called “Matching Grant” because participating agencies (private contractors) agree to match the ORR grant with cash and in-kind contributions (goods and services) from the “community”. The ORR awards $2 for every $1 raised by the refugee resettlement agency from non-federal sources – including state and local support, United Way contributions, and in-kind support from other local and volunteer organizations – up to a maximum of $2,200 in federal funds per refugee. So, self-sufficiency is the goal, but what are the results?
The Heartland Alliance for Human Needs & Human Rights refugee resettlement agency in Chicago is one of the contractors that the ORR monitored to assess how well resettlement agencies are helping refugees using the Matching Grant money. In the past Heartland Alliance’ use of US Department of State refugee grant money, as well as a human trafficking grant from the US Department of Justice, left much to be desired. Now, it seems that a ORR MG Program Analyst noted deficiencies in Heartland Alliance’s use of the MG program grant as well, according to a newly released 2005 inspection of the agency:
…Case Notes – …The reviewer found little detail of services being provided, particularly in cases where clients did not become self-sufficient…
…Asylee Payments – Some asylee cases were found to be missing required monthly payments…
…Housing Provision – ORR observed a number of cases [where] full rental payments were not provided for the required time period, although needed. This forced clients to supplement the rent payments with their MG cash…
…Job Development – The reviewer found little evidence of true job developments on the part of [Heartland Alliance]. The program employment outcomes appear to be the result of fairly intense case management coupled with relatively independent clients who find their own jobs. In cases where clients have a family or a strong community base to assist in the employment search, this system seems adequate in assisting clients to become self-sufficient. However, few to no modifications to that procedure were evident in dealing with free cases [refugees with no local family or ethnic community support] that do not have a strong community base to assist, or other instances where such assistance is necessary. Such sub-par employment services were particularly evident in low English level refugee clients. The [Heartland Alliance] employment rate for CY2004 was 50%. USCRI national average for CY2004 was 85%; the national MG average was 72%… Read more here
This last figure seems to point to a problem at Heartland Alliance and not MG Program weaknesses. Yet, it also shows how dependent government inspectors are on contractors’ own written records in assessing compliance with government grants. Aside from the problems noted, what comes to mind is to what degree the contractor’s written records match refugee clients’ reports about services received, however, the inspection report shows no comments from the clients (as opposed to the State Department’s reviews of refugee resettlement grantees).
Nevertheless, though the national average for refugee employment in the MG program was 82% that year, Heartland Alliance’s refugee clients in MG only achieved a 50% employment rate. Much of that 50% appears to have been refugees finding employment on their own or with the help of family or community.
Posted in asylees, Chicago, economic self-sufficiency, employment services, employment/jobs for refugees, Heartland Alliance, Matching Grant program, ORR | Tagged: Chicago, grant, inspection, Matching grant, monitoring, Office of Refugee Resettlement, ORR | Leave a Comment »
Posted by Christopher Coen on April 25, 2012
Memorial plaque to resistance members and wreath at the Bendlerblock, Berlin
Under Section 212(a)(3)(b) of current federal immigration law even the partisans who supported those who fought Nazis in Germany would have been designated as members of Tier III terrorist groups. How could that be? Well, according to an article in City Pages, “under the law, any group of ‘two or more individuals, whether organized or not, which engages in’ terrorist activity can be labeled a Tier III terrorist group, with ‘terrorist activity’ defined as any use of violence for purposes other than personal enrichment”. Not only that, but there is no publicly available list of Tier III terrorist groups. The article explains that groups are labeled Tier III on a case-by-case basis:
…Under Section 212(a)(3)(b) of federal immigration law, immigrants involved with terrorist groups are not admissable to the United States. But in the wake of 9/11, lawmakers broadly expanded the definition of “terrorist.” That transformed thousands of refugees and asylees already granted protection by the federal government into newly minted “terrorists,” delaying thousands of immigrants’ cases for months and years…
The USA PATRIOT Act created new definitions of “terrorist organizations” and providing “material support” to terrorism. It created two categories of terrorist organizations, labeled Tier I and Tier II. Maintained by the State Department, the list includes organizations like Al-Qaeda, Peru’s Shining Path, Colombia’s FARC, Al-Shabaab, and many others.
But the PATRIOT Act also created a third tier: “undesignated” terrorist organizations. Under the law, any group of “two or more individuals, whether organized or not, which engages in” terrorist activity can be labeled a Tier III terrorist group, with “terrorist activity” defined as any use of violence for purposes other than personal enrichment.
A 2005 bill, the REAL ID Act, broadened the PATRIOT Act’s definition of a “Tier III terrorist organization” to include any organization with a subgroup that engages in “terrorist activity.”
Unlike Tier I and Tier II organizations, there is no publicly available list of Tier III terrorist groups. Groups are labeled Tier III on a case-by-case basis, which is a problem for advocates.
“It’s so broadly written and written with such ambiguous language that it essentially allows the government at any time to assert that a group is a terrorist organization based on some very limited connection to violent activity,” says Ashley Huebner, a supervising attorney at the National Immigrant Justice Center. “And that’s where the majority of people are getting caught up.”…
…Critics of the terrorism bar contend that it transforms vulnerable asylees and refugees into terrorists and puts genuine heroes’ applications on hold. Under the current statute, even the partisans who supported those who fought Nazis in Germany would have been flagged… Read more here
Posted in Dept of Homeland Security, security/terrorism, State Department | Tagged: asylees, Freedom Fighters, PATRIOT Act, REAL ID Act, refugees, resettlement, resistance fighters, terrorist, terrorist group | Leave a Comment »
Posted by Christopher Coen on April 23, 2012
An article in the Salt Lake Tribune refers to the overall reduction in refugees being resettled to the US. Although the government set a goal of resettling 80,000 refugees for fiscal year 2011, only 56,424 refugees resettled. The goal again was 80,000 refugees for fiscal year 2012 but as of the end of March, halfway through that fiscal year, the federal government has resettled only 21,836 refugees. The slowdown is apparently due to the backlog in the security clearances done for each refugee by the Department of Homeland Security .
…The number of refugees coming to America has sharply declined in the past two years, as security measures have increased for newcomers coming from some of the most turbulent parts of the world.
“As credible threat information emerged, we had to enhance our screening process for the refugee program in order to make sure we were keeping our country safe,” said Deborah Sisbarro, public affairs adviser for the Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration, which is part of the U.S. State Department.
The decrease in arrivals — nearly 17,000 fewer refugees in 2011 than in 2010 — follows the high-profile arrest of two Iraqi refugees in 2011 on terrorism charges after they were resettled in Kentucky…
In 2011, 56,424 refugees arrived in the U.S., compared with 73,311 the year before.
Halfway into this federal fiscal year, the U.S. has welcomed 21,836 refugees, though federal officials continue to assure resettlement workers that numbers will climb.
Utah welcomed 836 refugees in 2011 versus 1,100 in 2010…
The decline has forced the IRC, one of a handful of resettlement agencies in Utah, to shrink its staff. Each refugee comes with about $700 from the federal government… Read more here
My first suspicion is that this large reduction of incoming refugees mainly includes Iraqi refugees, due to the security clearance backlog. Looking at the numbers at the State Department’s Refugee Processing Center website, however, it turns out that reductions are from each area of the world, although with refugees from Africa and the Near East losing the largest share. Only 26,000 refugees from the Near East/South Asia arrived in FY2011, compared to the 35,000 that the US federal government approved for resettlement. In addition, only 6000 refugees from Africa were let in compared to the 15,000 approved (whether this reduction is from across Africa or concentrated in one area, e.g. Somalia, I don’t know). Nevertheless, the security clearances backlog is affecting refugee rivals from all regions, including the 3000 unallocated lots — none of which were used in FY2011. (Also, a complicating factor related to the security clearances is that many Iraqis and Somalis have similar names, which can present a problem if US authorities consider someone else by the same name as a security threat).
Note: Regarding the $700 figure given for the federal government’s contribution per refugee – local refugee resettlement agencies get $700 per capita from the State Department for their overhead costs. As to what the State Department actually gives, that would be $1800 per capita just for initial refugee resettlement needs (refugees’ first 90 days). The federal government supplies other contributions via the US Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR).
Posted in ceiling limit, refugee annual, Dept of Homeland Security, R&P, RPC (Refugee Processing Center), security/terrorism | Tagged: Department of Homeland Security, Iraq, ORR, refugees, resettlement, security checks, security clearance, State Department | Leave a Comment »
Posted by Christopher Coen on April 22, 2012
Is the reason that we’re not meeting our moral obligation to resettle Iraqis who risked their lives to help us that our security bureaucracy has so many overlapping layers and redundancies that it’s almost impossible to navigate the system? In the post-9/11 era, under the Department of Homeland Security, one government agency doesn’t necessarily recognize another’s security checks. One refugee security check will often expire before the next is completed. Trudy Rubin, an Opinion Columnist at the Philadelphia Inquirer, gives her take on what is going on:
…Consider this: In 2008, Congress mandated 25,000 special immigrant visas (known as SIVs) for Iraqis who helped us over a period of five years; fewer than 4,500 have been issued. According to State Department figures, 719 were granted in fiscal 2011 and 569 during the first six months of fiscal 2012…
…Many Iraqis who helped Americans have chosen to apply for U.S. visas through another…refugee program. As of last July, there were 39,000 Iraqis on that waiting list. In the first six months of fiscal 2012, only 2,500 were admitted.
And most applicants have been waiting one to three years.
So what’s gone wrong? Why can’t we meet our moral obligation to Iraqis who risked their lives to help us?
My answer: We have a security bureaucracy that’s gone bonkers. In the post-9/11 era, under the Department of Homeland Security, we’ve set up so many overlapping layers and redundancies that it’s almost impossible to navigate the system. “One agency doesn’t necessarily recognize another’s security checks,” says Carey. “Often one check will expire before the next is completed.”
Take the case of A.M., who worked for the U.S. Army from 2009-11. He’s been waiting more than a year for his security clearance. Because of the wait, his U.S. Embassy-required medical exam “expired” and he had to take it again, paying another $400. Meanwhile, he is living in hiding, under death threat, afraid even to visit his wife and year-old daughter…
Or take A.L., who has been waiting for more than three years, took his medical exam three times, and fingerprints twice. The embassy gave him a date of a year ago, on which he was supposed to travel, but on that day he was told more security checks were needed. He had sold his business and his car, and is running out of money.
“We are threatened with death every moment,” he wrote me. “Is this what we deserve because we worked with U.S. forces. Please. Please. Help us.”
That will require the White House to tame the Kafkaesque Homeland Security bureaucracy, something that still hasn’t happened and probably needs presidential intervention. In the meantime, thousands of Iraqis suffer in limbo and America’s credibility takes a further beating.
“If we don’t [move on this], it will have a chilling effect on the willingness of people around the world to work with our missions,” Blinken admitted… Read more here
Posted in Dept of Homeland Security, Iraqi, IRC, security/terrorism, SIV (Special Immigrant Visa) immigrants | Tagged: Department of Homeland Security, Iraq, post-9/11 era, refugees, resettlement, security checks, security clearance, SIV, Special Immigrant Visa | 2 Comments »
Christopher Coen
Melissa Sogard
nancylee1
Comment submitted for today’s State Department hearing on size & scope of refugee program
Posted by Christopher Coen on May 1, 2012
Posted in capacity, dangerous neighborhoods, democracy, language interpretation/translation, lack of, Office of Admissions, openess and transparency in government, RPC (Refugee Processing Center), SIV (Special Immigrant Visa) immigrants, State Department, Travel Loan Program, volunteers, World Relief | Tagged: Advocate, comment, Domestic Resettlement Section, FY2013, public hearing, refugees, resettlement, RPC (Refugee Processing Center), State Department, US Department of State | 1 Comment »