Friends of Refugees

A U.S. Refugee Resettlement Program Watchdog Group

Archive for the ‘local officials, failure to notify’ Category

Parts Of Tennessee’s Refugee Act and State Dept’s Visit To State Stop Making Sense

Posted by Christopher Coen on February 12, 2012

David Robinson, acting assistant secretary of the Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration apparently spent some time discussing the new refugee law implemented in Tennessee last year – the Refugee Absorptive Capacity Act. State Sen. Jim Tracy, who sponsored the Act, alleges that the State Department thinks the new bill [actually a law now], which allows for local refugee moratoriums and codifies the federal regulation requiring quarterly meetings between resettlement agencies and local officials, is “just fine”. (???) An article in the Shelbyville Times-Gazette gives a view of the meeting from Tracy’s perspective:

A top representative of the U.S. State Department was in Tennessee this week to discuss a law dealing with the state’s refugee resettlement program.

The Refugee Absorptive Capacity Act, which originated from the desk of State Sen. Jim Tracy, became law last July. It’s the first bill of its kind.

It requires the state’s refugee program agency, Catholic Charities, to meet four times a year with local governments to plan and coordinate “the appropriate placement of refugees in advance of the refugees’ arrival …”

The law also allows local communities to apply for a “moratorium” on refugee resettlement if those agencies overload local resources, and so far, Tennessee is the only state that has passed this type of legislation…

A number of refugees from a variety of countries, such as Somalia, Burma and Egypt, have moved to Shelbyville in recent years to be closer to jobs at the Tyson Foods facility.

Tyson Foods needs workers who will willingly accept relatively low pay for the repetitive motion, cold environment jobs, and new refugee immigrants need jobs to support their families. (Alternatively, Americans could pay higher meat prices and the government could require companies like Tyson Foods to pay a more livable wage.)

…On Wednesday, David Robinson, acting assistant secretary of the Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration, met with Tracy and other parties to discuss the law passed last year, the state senator told the T-G.

“That was the whole purpose of the visit, and they thought the bill was fine,” Tracy said, but he added that even though provisions in the new state refugee law passed last year was already codified in federal law, it had not been enforced…

Perhaps the State Department refugee office isn’t bothered by the new law’s quarterly meetings requirement, since it’s already an ORR regulation, but why would they think that the new law is just fine? Are moratoriums compatible with the constitutional provision that allows people freedom of movement? The government may not single out specific groups of people to restrict their freedom of movement (individuals get to decide for themselves where they want to live in this country).

…”If you are going to bring refugees into a community, you need to meet with community leaders, mayor, councilmen, commissioners, school superintendents, hospitals, anyone that an influx of a refugee group would affect,” Tracy said, explaining the reasons for the law being passed last year.

…Tracy said he “thought it was interesting that we had to codify something in state law to get [the State Department's] attention.”…

Yes that is interesting. Also interesting is why other government refugee program-related regulations and contract requirements are also regularly ignored. World Relief feels free to worship on the public’s nickel, even though its prohibited by a federal regulation, and their ORR partner has ignored our complaint about that practice. Also, the quite minimal “minimum requirements” that the resettlement agencies agree to meet in the refugee program are regularly flouted, and the State Department refugee office does not enforce those requirements or penalize the resettlement contractors. In practice this does not seem to have been working well for decades — the resettlement contractors just continue to violate regulations and contract requirements year after year. (What does that say about the public/private partnership philosophy in which contractors are put on pedestals and government oversight agencies don’t exercise much authority?)

…Tracy explained he also had questions for Robinson, talking about the local unemployment rate and about refugees getting on state assisted benefits, while the State Department discussed “sustainability” of the refugees. Supposedly, the refugees have 90 days to become sustainable in this country, Tracy said.

“The question we had for them was ‘what’s the definition of sustainability,’” Tracy said. “We had a good discussion about it.”…

Gee, wouldn’t it be nice if they shared that discussion with the public? After all, this is a publicly run and funded humanitarian program. The State Department refugee office apparently gave advance notice to all so-called “stakeholders”, except for the last minute notice to the public and press.

…”It was a pretty high level meeting,” Tracy said. “They were very concerned who was going to be in the meeting, it was very interesting.”

Tracy said that the State Department wanted to clarify that they had no control over secondary migration, when refugees leave the city they were initially settled in and go elsewhere.

The senator said that’s why the law is “so important, because we’re bringing refugees into Tennessee, the majority of them settle in Nashville, Knoxville, Memphis and Chattanooga,” but they eventually migrate to smaller towns…

So, what the state senator doesn’t seem to understand is that, under the Refugee Absorptive Capacity Act, Shelbyville and other localities will not be able to request any local moratoriums on refugee resettlement since no one is resettling refugees to those places. Refugees are moving to Shelbyville on their own for meatpacking industry jobs, in what is known as “secondary migration”.

…”It was interesting that they (the State Department) would travel to Tennessee to talk about the legislation that we passed last year and I really take it as a compliment,” Tracy said Friday. “I think they were already supposed to be doing that, and in Tennessee, they have to be doing that now.” Read more here

I guess I’d like to hear the State Department’s version of what was said at this “pretty high level meeting”, but since they treat refugee resettlement as a secret program, which seems only to guard against accountability, I won’t hold my breath.

***UPDATE*** — While the public had to sit outside the meeting one of the so-called “stakeholders” invited to the meeting was the lobbyist Jennifer Murphy of the Catholic Public Policy Commission of Tennessee.

Posted in State Department, ORR, World Relief, Cooperative Agreement, Somali, Assistant Secretary of the PRM, meatpacking industry, public/private partnership, Tennessee, openess and transparency in government, secondary migration, refugee, local officials, failure to notify, capacity, Catholic Charities of Tennessee, Joint Quarterly Placement Planning Meeting, Joint Quarterly Placement Planning Meeting, legislation, Murfreesboro/Shelbyville | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

State Department reduced Manchester refugee resettlement from 300 to 200 per year

Posted by Christopher Coen on November 26, 2011

An article in the New York Times mentions that the International Institute (a USCRI affiliate) proposed to resettle 300 refugees in Manchester this fiscal year, but that the State Department trimmed that down to 200 while rejecting City officials’ request for a moratorium (only last summer the plan was to resettle 400-600 refugees). William J. Gillett, chairman of the Institute’s board claims that his agency does the best they can within the price constraints they have, and that they would try harder to work with the city.

MANCHESTER, N.H. — This city has long been a resettlement site for refugees, sent here by the State Department for a chance at a better life. ..

…But this year, after decades of taking in refugees, Manchester said, “Enough.”

In a highly unusual move, Mayor Ted Gatsas and the city’s Board of Aldermen asked the State Department in July to halt resettlements here for now…

…The mayor, a Republican who just won a second term, says he has nothing against refugees. His problem is with the International Institute of New England…

…For the International Institute, which has been resettling refugees in New Hampshire for decades, the moratorium request came as a shock, said William J. Gillett, chairman of the agency’s board…

“We did not believe the numbers we were suggesting were in any way inappropriate,” Mr. Gillett said. “We didn’t see any evidence of undue strain on city resources.”

Although refugees are also resettled in other New Hampshire cities, including Concord and Nashua, far more come to Manchester, the largest city in northern New England, because it has more jobs, affordable housing and public transportation.

“It’s one of the most fabulous places in the world to resettle,” said Carolyn Benedict-Drew, the institute’s president and chief executive.

But the institute admits that affordable apartments have sometimes proved unacceptable. In 2009, a bedbug infestation at a former mill building that houses refugees grabbed headlines and raised awareness of the squalid conditions some were living in. Patrick Long, a Democratic alderman who voted for the moratorium, said the institute “just wasn’t there to help” with the bedbug problem, which led to a city task force that came up with recommendations for improving refugee housing, education and other needs. “The apartments they were putting them in were shabby,” he said, “and their employment numbers were misleading.”

On housing, Mr. Gillett said, “We do the best we can within the price constraints we have.”…

…Mr. Bartlett said that after hearing the city’s concerns, his office had decided to send some 200 refugees to Manchester this fiscal year, which began Oct. 1, instead of the 300 proposed by the International Institute. While the State Department often tinkers with the numbers proposed by resettlement agencies, he said, “this was probably a more significant reduction than we would normally make.”

A moratorium would make no sense, he said, partly because virtually all refugees scheduled to arrive in Manchester this year have family here and would likely end up in the city even if they were initially sent somewhere else.

Meanwhile, leaders of the International Institute said they would try harder to work with the city. Michael McGandy, who started in March as the institute’s site manager in Manchester, said high staff turnover… had perhaps kept the agency from communicating with the city as much as it should… Read more here

An editorial in the New Hampshire Herald speculated that the real reason for the moratorium request was perhaps the $4 million dollars per year that the City is spending on special needs children (many refugees being in that group due to the language barrier and/or a lack of earlier education). The editorial staff thought that the City may have been trying to save money due to budget problems.

I’m disappointed, however, with Mr. Gillett’s claim – in regard to the squalor that people have found refugees living in – that his organization does the best it can within the price constraints. Its much less a matter of money than it is the nature of the refugee experience and their psychology. Due to their earlier experiences of abuse by authorities in the circumstances they have fled from, most do not trust authority figures. Without help from refugee contractors, such as the Institute and other organizations, many of them will not demand improvements in substandard living conditions. Unfortunately, there are many landlords that will take advantage of that.

Mr. Gillett also claims that the moratorium request came as a shock. What that tells me is that either he was completely out of touch with the worsening relationship with City leaders, or that he was fairly certain that there would be no consequences for that. Neither of those positions would have been in the refugees’ best interests.

I also note that the International Institute of New England’s disingenuous claim on their website that they have “…in partnership with the U.S. Department of State, decreased the number of placements from 300 to 200.”

Posted in housing, housing, substandard, International Institute of NE, International Institute of New Hampshire, local officials, failure to notify, moratorium / restriction, New Hampshire, State Department | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Proposed TN legislation would codify the federal regulation to “consult with local communities”

Posted by Christopher Coen on February 22, 2011

A bill in the Tennessee legislature would mandate, via state law, that refugee resettlement agencies consult with local communities. The Shelbyville Times-Gazette has an article explaining the proposed legislation:

…Refugee bill

SB1670 is another bill [State Sen. Jim] Tracy filed with Bedford County in mind. The proposed legislation would codify federal regulations to ensure that local communities would be able to absorb refugees.

The bill would make sure that a town’s “absorptive capacity” would be evaluated at regular intervals in consultation between the local governments and the resettlement agencies before commitments are made for refugee resettlement….

…Tracy said that there has been “a lot of discussion across the state about this, particularly in Bedford County … but other counties also.” The proposed bill would require resettlement agencies to let local governments know when a large number of refugees are coming “because it puts a burden on the local community.”

The bill would require the charitable organizations that sponsor the refugees to let the state know when refugees are coming, how many, “what they’re (the agencies) getting paid and where the money is going.”

In 2008, the state withdrew from administering refugee services, but appointed Catholic Charities as the fiduciary agency for the state’s refugee programs.

The Tennessee Office for Refugees, a department of Catholic Charities, would be required to meet four times a year with local governments representatives to plan and coordinate the appropriate placement of refugees in advance of their arrival…

…The state refugee office would also be required to accept applications from a local government for a moratorium on new resettlement if the host community “lacks sufficient absorptive capacity,” the bill reads.

If a determination is made that further resettlement in the host community “would result in an adverse impact to existing residents,” then the Tennessee Office for Refugees would suspend additional resettlement until it is jointly determined by local officials and the state refugee coordinator that there is an “absorptive capacity.”

The bill is cosponsored by Sens. Ken Yager and Rusty Crowe, with the House version of the bill introduced by Rep. Bill Dunn of the 16th District… Read more here

Currently, state refugee coordinators are required, via ORR regulations, to convene quarterly meetings each year whereby representatives of local resettlement agencies, local community service agencies, and other agencies that serve refugees meet with representatives of State and local governments to plan and coordinate the proper placement of refugees in advance of the refugees’ arrival.

In addition, according to the U.S. State Department’s Cooperative Agreement contract with refugee resettlement agencies ”the number of refugees assigned to an approved applicant will be determined by the [State Department], in accordance with the needs of the Admissions Program, taking into account… placement recommendations of state and local officials…” (see V. Refugee Caseload Assignment).

Apparently, federal regulations mean little when not enforced, thus requiring local codification. Let’s see where this goes.

Posted in Catholic Charities of Tennessee, Cooperative Agreement, local officials, failure to notify, ORR, reform, State Department, Tennessee | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Refugee Resettlement Resumes In Fredericksburg, VA

Posted by Christopher Coen on November 3, 2010

The Catholic Diocese of Arlington’s Office of Migration and Refugee Services is resuming refugee resettlement at their sub-office in Fredericksburg, Virginia, just seven months after local church leaders asked that resettlement stop due to mismanagement of the program by the agency and neglect of refugees, here and here. The Fredericksburg Free Lance-Star gives more information:

As many as 100 refugees could come to the Fredericksburg area in the next year.

Officials with the Catholic Diocese of Arlington’s Office of Migration and Refugee Services announced the expected arrivals seven months after area church leaders asked the federal government to stop the flow of refugees here.

But refugee services officials also announced different leadership and more staff in the local resettlement office.

And area volunteers hope that this time around, refugees will be resettled successfully, thanks to the shakeup in the refugee services office.

“I believe we can do this in a much better way than we experienced last March,” said the Rev. Ted Snow, pastor of Regester United Methodist Church in Stafford County. Snow said he is “a staunch supporter” of resettlement, but in March he joined area local leaders criticizing the local process.

Over the past five years, more than 500 refugees have resettled in the Fredericksburg area.

In their home countries they faced torture, death or persecution. The State Department invites the refugees, who are resettled locally through the Office of Migration and Refugee Services.

In the past three years, local officials have criticized the resettlement process, saying it seemed that the federal government invited the refugees in, dropped them into the area and promptly forgot about them.

They also complained that the local resettlement office was understaffed and failed to communicate with groups offering to help refugees get on their feet here.

Tensions rose as church leaders, social workers, educators and volunteers struggled to meet the demands of an often needy population. They provided transportation, English classes, summer camps, jobs and financial help…Read more here

Church leaders say that after they made their official complaint last March they didn’t hear anything from the Catholic Diocese of Arlington until September.

…In March, about 20 volunteers, clergy, social workers and educators met with resettlement leaders and state and federal government officials.

That meeting did little to smooth tensions, but the refugees services officials promised to communicate more with the community.

And church leaders said that was the last time they heard from the resettlement office until September.

Now resettlement officials have reached out to the community, and a meeting is planned for tomorrow.

Catholic Charities of Arlington, which oversees the Office of Migration and Refugee Services, has a new president. And the Fredericksburg resettlement center now has a manager…

Some church leaders say they have their hands full with the refugees that the Catholic Diocese of Arlington already resettled to the area,and they will not help bring in more refugees.

…Some who have helped with resettlement efforts in the pastt have said they won’t attend the meeting. They plan to concentrate on helping the refugees who are already here.

The Rev. Larry Haun, one of the most vocal leaders calling for a halt in local resettlements, will not attend. His congregation, Fredericksburg Baptist Church, still helps dozens of newcomer families with transportation, money, tutoring, school supplies, clothes and more.

“I wish them well. I hope it goes well, but we’ve got more than we can do with what we have now,” Haun said…

Posted in faith-based, Catholic, fredericksburg, Catholic Diocese of Arlington, churches, fractious relationships with volunteers, local officials, failure to notify | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Church overwhelmed; World Relief Spokane office defiant

Posted by Christopher Coen on September 12, 2010

A church working with World Relief in Spokane says that they cannot keep up with the flow of refugees to the city, according to an article in The Spokane Spokesman. The church’s pastor says that World Relief must draw the line somewhere, or have it drawn for them.

In the fall of 2006, a young Spokane pastor and his wife welcomed an extended family of 12 ethnic Burmese refugees into their East Central neighborhood church called Jacob’s Well and prayed that more would come.

Nearly four years later, that family has been joined by more than 600 Burmese, and the Rev. Eric Blauer wonders how many more refugees from around the world his church, the city and the nation can handle in these tough economic times.

“From our standpoint it’s hard to figure out how we can keep receiving refugees who are unprepared for the realities they find when they get here,” Blauer said…

…ardent refugee advocates such as Blauer believe there are limits to the education, health care and social service resources available to support large, low-income populations of people whose attempts to find employment are impeded by culture and language.

World Relief and other voluntary refugee resettlement agencies must draw the line somewhere or have it drawn for them, they say. here

But the recalcitrant director of World Relief in Spokane, Mark Kadel, indicates that he has no intention of listening to feedback from churches, such as Jacob’s Well, that are working with his organization. He intends to try to bring MORE refugees to Spokane, and not less. Despite his defiance, he may have trouble getting through Washington state’s Office of Refugee and Immigrant Assistance, whose chief, Tom Medina, says that given the economic situation, this is not the time to increase the flow of refugees to the area.

…World Relief, the resettlement agency responsible for bringing thousands of refugees to Spokane over the past 24 years, says it would like to bring more – not fewer…

…Last year, Washington state received 2,588 refugees. Of the 80,000 refugees authorized to be admitted into the United States this year, Washington is expected to get as many as 2,900, including 500 in Spokane. World Relief expected to bring even more to Spokane next year.

The Baltimore-based agency has no intention of slowing the flow of refugees, says Mark Kadel, World Relief’s director in Spokane.

“Absolutely not. If anything, we need to move forward,” Kadel said in a recent interview.

Kadel said the United States provides a safe haven for less than 1 percent of the 13 million people suffering in refugee camps, and “we are not doing our share”…

…Tom Medina, chief of Washington’s Office of Refugee and Immigrant Assistance, looked at the state budget and advised the six resettlement agencies operating in the state to slow the flow of refugees this year.

Two other agencies – the U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants and Catholic Charities of Spokane – attempted this year to begin new resettlement programs in Spokane. Medina convinced them that given the economic situation, this was not the time to initiate new refugee streams.

And then this statement:

Although resettlement agencies like World Relief are not required to notify municipalities about the number of refugees they may be bringing in, they are required under the federal Refugee Act to show that they have at least consulted with someone in state government.

That’s not correct. According to the State Department contract that World Relief signed, the Cooperative Agreement, World Relief must, “…colaborate with state and local officials, other agencies and services in the area in implementing a plan to rationalize the numbers of refugees to be resettled and to ensure quality services and a welcoming atmosphere are provided to refugees.”

By the way, I had an experience myself with Mark Kadel. In 2003 I discovered Lost Boys of Sudan refugees at World Relief’s Tampa affiliate in New Port Richey who complained of severe neglect and mistreatment by the agency. The refugees said that World Relief placed them in unfurnished apartments where they had to sleep on the floor for months, and that the agency made them work in their warehouse moving furniture and then setting up apartments for new refugees, but never paid them for the work. They also said that they had to spend days cleaning nursing homes but were never paid for the work. The World Relief refugees said that before they did the cleaning that a World Relief employee made them sign pieces of paper that he had folded over so that they couldn’t see what they were signing. When World Relief finally helped them get jobs, the jobs were in a different county, and the refugees had to wake early at 4am to commute by bike three hours to their jobs.

I wrote to the State Department and the ORR to forward the refugees’ complaints, but the agencies did not bother to respond. I then wrote to the agencies again in 2004 and 2005 to report ongoing complaints from the refugees. In May 2005 the refugees told us that Mark Kadel came to their apartments and represented himself as a U.S. State Department employee. One of the refugees said that when he asked for Mr. Kadel’s business card, Mr. Kadel failed to produce one, and that he then asked Mr. Kadel to leave the apartment. Mr. Kadel also contacted me, and this time, misrepresented himself as a “mediator”, and tried to get information from me about the complaint. Of course, the organization that is the subject of the complaint could never act as a mediator.

State Department monitors then showed up in New Port Richey to talk to World Relief employees and the refugees. After speaking to dozens of refugees and inspecting World Relief’s records, which indicated extreme disrespect for their refugee clients, the State Department then canceled World Relief Tampa’s refugee resettlement contract.

Posted in Burma/Myanmar, churches, Cooperative Agreement, evangelical, faith-based, local officials, failure to notify, ORR, Spokane, State Department, Sudanese, Washington, World Relief | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | 8 Comments »

Senator Richard Lugar of Indiana issues report on refugee resettlement program

Posted by Christopher Coen on July 24, 2010

Indiana US Senator Richard Lugar, Ranking Member on the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has released a report on the nation’s refugee resettlement program. While repeating the mantra that the solution to all problems is for the federal government to spend more for the program (therefore, tax and spend), the report also takes critical swipes at the private resettlement agencies.
 
According to the report refugee resettlement agencies have failed local communities in key areas:
  • Local governments rarely have an official role in influencing how many refugees are resettled by local voluntary agencies and often are not even informed in advance that new residents will be arriving. The process should require local resettlement agencies to formally consult with state and local officials/service providers regarding the proposed number and backgrounds of refugees to be resettled in the area. The refugee coordinators in each state and PRM representatives should verify that the consultations took place and that the views of the officials/service providers are accurately characterized.

I wonder if Senator Lugar and his staff are aware that state refugee coordinators are already required, via ORR regulations, to convene quarterly meetings each year whereby representatives of local resettlement agencies, local community service agencies, and other agencies that serve refugees meet with representatives of State and local governments to plan and coordinate the proper placement of refugees in advance of the refugees’ arrival.

In addition, according to the State Department’s Cooperative Agreement contract with refugee resettlement agencies ”the number of refugees assigned to an approved applicant will be determined by the [State Department], in accordance with the needs of the Admissions Program, taking into account… placement recommendations of state and local officials…” (see  V. Refugee Caseload Assisgnment).

So, Senator Lugar is suggesting creating more requirements when the federal government is not enforcing almost identical existing requirements. Existing regulations and contract requirements are ignored, so just add more?

  • The administration should improve accountability by examining: A. Institutional processes and practices of voluntary agencies, including but not limited to factors that influence the scope of an agency’s annual refugee resettlement proposal submitted to PRM, organizational structure, and administrative overhead to ensure an adherence to best practices and a resettlement program that is sensitive to local community capacity. B. Oversight and accountability metrics used by PRM for monitoring voluntary agencies as well as mechanisms for assessing internal strengths and inefficiencies within PRM’s administrative processes, the nature of PRM’s consultations with local and state elected officials, and the factors influencing the annual cap of refugees admitted to the United States. C. Mechanisms used for assessing internal strengths and inefficiencies in the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) within the Department of Health and Human Services, the nature of ORR’s consultations with local and state elected officials, and the extent of ORR’s capacity to oversee voluntary agency grantees, address the unique needs of refugees, fact-find into community capacity shortfalls as well as monitor the impact of secondary migration—potentially through some type of targeted census. D. Metrics for evaluating refugee integration, including but not limited to qualitative and quantitative measurements of employment levels, language acquisition, community interaction, etc.

In terms of quantitative measurements of employment levels the federal government already records employment numbers at 90 and 180 days. Is Senator Lugar recommending that these be measured again at say, the one-year mark, two-year mark, or what? Or is Senator Lugar simply unaware that employment rates are already measured?

 

How would anyone measure “community interaction”? Plus, most American citizens wouldn’t even pass that measurement if you look at things like voting participation, participation in community groups, etc.　

  • The administration should require voluntary agencies to [promote community engagement by] submitting as part of their annual proposals a ‘‘community engagement strategy,’’ which delineates concrete plans for increasing public awareness of and interaction with refugees, in order to achieve greater community cohesion. …Providing opportunities for established residents and families to engage members of the refugee population will help to demystify preconceptions and make integration more achievable. Encouraging face-to-face interactions between individuals or small groups can also make inter-ethnic encounters less intimidating for all participants.

No argument there. The problem is that many of the resettlement agencies are incompetent at these type of tasks. I recently attended a court commission that was looking at how the courts deal with racial and ethnic minorities. Hardly any refugees or other minorities showed up to testify. A refugee resettlement agency director on the commission panel, a former refugee himself, said his outreach to the refugees did not even include outreach to the main places where they gather — churches and mosques.

And then there’s this tidbit about how refugee resettlement agencies in Clarkston, Georgia (an Atlanta suburb) reacted when called on to account to the public.

  • Georgia Representative Karla Drenner, whose district includes Clarkston, convened a townhall meeting [this past year] where she publicly encouraged the voluntary agencies located within the city to improve communication with elected officials and to provide more warning regarding when refugees were due to arrive. The current mayor of Clarkston, Howard Tygrett, reported that all of the resettlement agencies subsequently relocated outside of the city limits in order to circumvent this appeal.

By the way, in the report Deborah McMahan, Health Commissioner of Fort Wayne-Allen County Department of Health, noted that prearrival health screenings for refugees no longer include HIV/AIDS testing. Prior knowledge of HIV status, she explained, would allow for better planning for the complicated care that refugees with such conditions require.

Posted in Atlanta, Burma/Myanmar, Fort Wayne, funding, Georgia, Indiana, late health screenings, local officials, failure to notify, ORR, PRM, reform, State Department | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

USCCB’s Catholic Diocese of Arlington Caught Neglecting Refugees, Area Churches Say Enough Is Enough

Posted by Christopher Coen on March 29, 2010

The media caught yet another refugee resettlement agency neglecting their refugee clients — USCCB’s Catholic Diocese of Arlington’s Office of Migration and Refugee Services. Area churches say enough is enough, that they will no longer allow USCCB to treat refugees inhumanely and ignore refugee program guidelines (see article).

…volunteers from Fredericksburg-area churches unrolled an elaborate welcome mat. But now, church staff and volunteers say enough is enough.

“This is a justice issue,” said the Rev. Larry Haun, pastor of Fredericksburg Baptist Church. “We don’t want to be understood as being against refugee resettlement. We just think that when they’re resettled, they should be treated according to the guidelines. They should be treated humanely.

“When people are invited here, and when they aren’t given food, when they aren’t given beds, when they aren’t given blankets, that’s injustice.”

It is also a legal issue. Resettlement agencies contract with the federal government and agree to provide beds, blankets, food or money for food, other furniture and linens.

At a meeting in late February, local church leaders asked the U.S. Department of State to stop sending refugees to the Fredericksburg area.

The refugees are invited by the State Department and resettled by the Catholic Diocese of Arlington’s Office of Migration and Refugee Services. The office’s Fredericksburg Refugee Service Center has a satellite location on Butler Road in Stafford County.

The Catholic resettlement agency, after taking an enormous amount of help from local churches and community members, apparently decided to exclude the churches and local volunteers after they started voicing concerns. Refugees said the Catholic agency workers then warned them not to talk to church volunteers about their situations or to take their help.

Newcomers arrived and volunteers did not know–until established refugees told stories of families with little furniture, food or transportation.

Volunteers from several area churches stepped in to help. But they say that they could rarely reach the resettlement office. Resettlement officials said they are protecting their clients’ privacy.

Refugees said they’ve been warned not to talk to church volunteers about their situations or to take their help.

“We tell them: ‘Don’t take free stuff. Work for what you get,’” said Derek Maxfield, associate director of the Arlington Diocese’s Migration and Refugee Services.

Don’t take free stuff?! That’s what the refugee resettlement program is all about — community members donating free stuff and time to help refugees so that the government doesn’t have to do it all alone, otherwise known as the “public/private partnership”. Hello! Apparently the Catholic agency is forgetting that is how they just convinced the State Department to double R&P funding, by claiming that they give too much free stuff and volunteer time, via churches, community groups and other volunteers, and that the government must do more (here).

The Catholic resettlement agency’s warnings to refugees not to speak to volunteers, something we have documented all over the country when we catch an agency neglecting their refugee clients (is it written in their playbook?), is nothing less than a form of intimidation and abuse of vulnerable clients.  Refugee clients should NEVER be used as pawns when refugee resettlement agencies attempt to avoid accountability. Not to mention the refugees’ constitutional right to freedom of association. They may speak to or befriend anyone they wish, despite refugee resettlement agencies treatment of them as second-class citizens.

Seyoum Berhe, director of the Archdiocese of Arlington Migration and Refugee Services, also claims that refugees only get four months of help. Not true. That’s only for refugees enrolled in ORR’s Matching Grant Program (and they can get up to six months help, if the resettlement agency will give it to them, not just four), and refugees enrolled in Matching Grant are able to apply for refugee cash assistance if they are still unemployed after four months (they can get help up to the end of their eighth month). Anyway, only 30% of refugees are in Matching Grant. Most refugees get at least eight months of help if they can’t find a job. Low income refugee families with children can get assistance even longer.

In fact, Berhe compares resettling refugees to raising teenagers. And in the resettlement program, refugees typically have four months to be self-supporting.

“We’re like tough parents,” Berhe said.

Resettlement contracts with the State Department require the basics: furnished homes, English classes and help finding jobs. Financial assistance–which comes through a few federal and state agencies–lasts only a few months.

But many volunteers say refugees require more than what the resettlement workers provide.

So then the question becomes, why did USCCB decide to resettle the particular refugees that they did in Fredericksburg? We know that the VOLAGs meet each month and decide which refugees they will take and where they will resettle them. They meet right there in Arlington at the State Department’s Refugee Processing Center (RPC). Why did USCCB decide to take Burundi and Iraqi refugees and resettle them to Fredericksburg? Is there any local torture center that can help rehabilitate the Iraqi refugees? The Burundian refugees started arriving in large numbers 4-5 years ago. We know they have greater needs than other refugees. Why did USCCB think that Fredericksburg was the right site for them?

When Arlington’s Migration and Refugee Services chose Fredericksburg for resettlement, starting-level jobs were plentiful.

Many refugees found jobs quickly and were able to afford the rents. But as the recession deepened, jobs grew scarce.

At the time, more refugees were coming, and they had greater needs.

For example, those from Burundi in central Africa had spent decades in refugee camps. They often came with little formal education and did not know how to use indoor plumbing, electricity or cars.

And some refugees from Iraq came with severe emotional scars. They needed mental health resources, something already scarce in the area.

….When the national resettlement agencies’ staff decide where to place refugees, they look at communities’ capacity.

Then there is the issue of the federal requirement that local government agencies MUST be consulted about refugee resettlement and placement issues. Is there enough local capacity? In this case the Catholic Church decided to just ignore that requirement, as we see all too often, and the State Department and the ORR apparently didn’t even care enough to enforce their own requirements — once again!

Capacity takes into account social services and nonprofits, schools, health departments and jobs.

School officials, social services directors and health department officials said they were never asked how many refugees they could handle.

Of course we just saw this problem in New Hampshire, where the state refugee coordinator claimed she couldn’t require the local resettlement agencies to coordinate with local government agencies — even though that is what the law requires! (here)

The law/regulations that govern the U.S. refugee resettlement program (45 C.F.R. PART 400—REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT PROGRAM, see 400.5:H) requires that local refugee resettlement agencies meet regularly with local government officials.

 “…the State will…assure that meetings are convened, not less often than quarterly, whereby representatives of local resettlement agencies, local community service agencies, and other agencies that serve refugees meet with representatives of State and local governments to plan and coordinate the appropriate placement of refugees in advance of the refugees’ arrival.”

Also, according to the State Department Cooperative Agreement contract that USCCB signed USCCB must:

“…colaborate with state and local officials, other agencies and services in the area in implementing a plan to rationalize the numbers of refugees to be resettled and to ensure quality services and a welcoming atmosphere are provided to refugees.”

So, where is Virginia’s state refugee coordinator, Kathy Cooper? She’s the director of the Virginia Office of Newcomer Services and supposedly coordinates all of this in Virginia. Now, after the resettlement agency neglected the refugees she says all sides involved in resettlement in Fredericksburg need to talk more. Yeah, but what about the required consultation with local government agencies before resettlement agencies bring refugees in and dump them off? That’s the advantage of following regulations. They tend to be there for a good reason.

The problem we have with government oversight agencies is the same problem we have with the private refugee resettlement agencies — there are no consequences for ignoring regulations and requirements. In the meantime the Congress just keeps rewarding them with more money. This is a recipe for more refugee neglect, more refugee abuse, and more negative articles in the media — something that will both damage more refugees’ lives, and damage the program even further.

See State Department 2007 monitoring. Note that in spite of their inspection and their recommendations, with no penalties imposed not much seems to have changed.

*Update — April 2, 2010 Editorial at Free Lance-Star (here)

Posted in arlington, Burundian, Catholic, Catholic Diocese of Arlington, Christian, Cooperative Agreement, faith-based, fredericksburg, funding, government, intimidation of refugees, Iraqi, local officials, failure to notify, mental health, New Hampshire, ORR, R&P, religion, RPC (Refugee Processing Center), State Department, USCCB, Virginia, volunteers | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Is International Institute of New Hampshire out of compliance too?

Posted by Christopher Coen on March 6, 2010

The Mayor of Manchester, New Hamphire, Ted Gatsas, in a letter to the state refugee coordinator this week has accused the International Institute of New Hampshire (a USCRI affiliate) of, “steering newly arrived refugees into ‘substandard’ apartments and failing to ensure their health and well-being.”  (here)

The March 2 letter asks the state to pressure the agency to change its ways. It calls for new regulations requiring the International Institute of New Hampshire to meet regularly with city officials and to notify the city before new refugees arrive. The mayor’s letter also asks the state refugee coordinator, Barbara Seebart, to subject the agency to a performance audit “based on objective service and success standards.” Seebart said her office does not have the authority to conduct such an audit, nor for that matter can it require a resettlement agency to consult the city about its work. She said she plans to refer the mayor’s letter to “the appropriate party,” though as of yesterday, she was not sure who, specifically, that might be. One thing the state already does keep tabs on, according to Seebart, is whether the International Institute makes good use of federal grant dollars. Portions of that money are supposed to go to English-language classes, job placement assistance and preventive health services. In each of those areas, Seebart said, the agency has performed well. …. Alderman Pat Long said he has been hearing “horror stories” for years about refugees being placed in unfurnished apartments with several building code violations. “It’s gotten out of hand,” he said.

So poor people live in apartments without furniture? But, International Institute of New Hampshire has been paid by the State Department to provide minimum furnishings, you know, the stuff outlined in that pesky thing called a contract (see Operational Guidance).

Bedding (described as bed frame and spring, or equivalent, and mattress) appropriate for age and gender composition of family. One set of drawers, shelves, or other unit appropriate for storage of clothing per family.  One kitchen table per famil.y  One kitchen chair per person.  One couch per family, or equivalent seating (in addition to kitchen chairs). One lamp per room, unless installed lighting is present.

Furthermore, the law/regulations that govern the U.S. refugee resettlement program (45 C.F.R. PART 400—REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT PROGRAM, see 400.5:H) requires that local refugee resettlement agencies meet regularly with local government officials.

 “…the State will…assure that meetings are convened, not less often than quarterly, whereby representatives of local resettlement agencies, local community service agencies, and other agencies that serve refugees meet with representatives of State and local governments to plan and coordinate the appropriate placement of refugees in advance of the refugees’ arrival.”

Also, according to the the State Department contract — the Cooperative Agreement — that USCRI signed, the International Institute of New Hampshire must:

“…colaborate with state and local officials, other agencies and services in the area in implementing a plan to rationalize the numbers of refugees to be resettled and to ensure quality services and a welcoming atmosphere are provided to refugees.”

Why doesn’t the state refugee coordinator seem to understand these basics? What does she mean that she can’t require a resettlement agency to consult the city about its work?

Furthermore, I don’t know why anyone would be opposed to audits. How else would anyone know if public contracts are being complied with, and that public money is being used according to requirements?

By the way, according to the latest State Department monitoring (2004) of the other refugee resettlement agency in new Hampshire, Lutheran Community Services of Northern New England, that agency was not meeting contract requirements either (here). There was a lack of dresser drawers, clothing, pocket money and prepared meals for refugees upon their arrival.

Posted in government, local officials, failure to notify, New Hampshire, Operational Guidance, R&P, USCRI | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 84 other followers