In 2010, the US Department of State doubled the initial per-refugee resettlement stipend to $1800 (while allowing resettlement contractors to keep $700 of that for overhead). Today they announced (below) that they have raised it again this year. (It would be refreshing if they made some of these announcements before they make the decisions, and not after, to allow for public response). When they decide to give us the rest of the details perhaps they will tell us how much of that increase they will allow for the contractors’ overhead. All of it should go directly to the refugees. If the non-profit agencies – resettlement contractors – actually make real private contributions (once claimed as 25 cents for each dollar given by the State Department, or feds, although no proof offered) then I guess I don’t understand why, at the very least, they can’t pay their own overhead costs. 

…We understand that the current economic situation is challenging the ability of federal, state, and non-profit agencies to broadly assist refugees in need. In response, in 2010, the Department of State doubled the per-refugee stipend, and raised it again this year. The refugee admissions program is a public-private partnership. As such, non-profit agencies involved have also increased efforts to raise private resources to support refugees in need. And some businesses are stepping in to assist as well…

Kind regards,
David M. Robinson
Acting Assistant Secretary
Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration Read more here

Yesterday, the ORR put out a PR-like statement about the launch of its new website (see below). Last year at this time the ORR was three years behind on its annual report to congress. I wrote to my senator to ask how much longer the congress was going to tolerate this and his office said that they were promising to get one report out quite soon (the FY 2008 report came out in May 2011) and then a second one would be out some months after that (FY 2009 still not released). It seems like congressional offices are more than satisfied with these type of responses (a mere positive sounding answer somehow instills trust). Now, a year later the ORR is right back to where it was – three years behind on these reports, hence, this question: how did they find all the time to revamp the website, which now includes testimonials from happy refugee clients, when they are not fulfilling other basic responsibilities?

Greetings,

The Office of Refugee Resettlement is pleased to introduce you to…ORR’s new home page, where you will find the latest ORR news, stories of those who have participated in our programs and links to useful resources. From refugee assistance to anti-trafficking in persons, this new website features grantees and participants who are part of the growing ORR family, providing new populations with the opportunity to maximize their potential…

Thank you for your continued interest in the work of the Office of Refugee Resettlement.

Eskinder Negash

Director

The ORR gave the following update today regarding a telephone scam targeting Bhutanese refugees first reported in January:

In early January, we circulated a message concerning a telephone scam targeting refugees. At that time, a man was calling Bhutanese refugees, identifying himself as a representative of the “Federal Grants Department” from a Washington, DC-based telephone number, 202-436-9601, informing recently resettled refugees that they were eligible to receive $10,000 because they are refugees from Bhutan. To claim the money, they were instructed to produce a money order for $650, and call the telephone number for further instructions on where to send the money.

We have received updated reports that the scam is still on-going, but some of the details have since changed.  Most recently, refugees (again, still Bhutanese) have received calls from a man who identifies himself as “Nathan Price with the IRS” calling from a different DC-based telephone number, 202-657-4189, who instructs the refugees to have money wired to various people in India.

The most recent target of this scam lost over $6,000.

ORR advises everyone to be aware of this scam, and avoid giving any personal information or making payments to unknown callers.

Please note that the federal government does not demand processing fees, security deposits, or overseas wire transfers from grant recipients or refugees.  If you are the target of a suspicious request, please contact your local police or resettlement agency for further assistance.

Con artists continue their evil ways with our refugee population, looking to victimize those who are the most vulnerable. Scams include selling immigration forms (these forms are free), and taking money for green cards, 1-94 cards and the immigrant lottery (and then disappearing with the money). Refugees may report scams anonymously, by using the website uscis.gov, or by calling 1-877-382-4357. An article in the Union Leader explains the various cons and how refugees can report them:

…Scams…are occurring daily across New Hampshire and other states, according to local Immigration officials…

“There are people out there that are victimizing members of [the refugee and immigrant] community because they think they won’t be a good witness,” said Alfred Rubega, assistant U.S. attorney for New Hampshire. “I think they are going to find out pretty quickly in New Hampshire that is not at all a good idea.”

On Wednesday, authorities held a news conference to explain the Unlawful Practice of Immigration Law Initiative, a program intended to help catch con artists. The initiative is a joint effort among the USCIS, the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission.

The initiative is built on three pillars: enforcement, education and collaboration. It is intended to stop scams and prosecute those responsible; educate immigrants about scams and how to avoid them; and inform immigrants about the proper, legal immigration process and where to find legitimate legal advice and representation…

…Different cons

One of the more popular scams uses websites to advertise immigration services or pertinent forms for a fee. One clue a website is phony is when it ends in anything other than the “.gov” tag.

“We’ve heard reports that people have fallen victim to these bogus websites,” said Simon Abi Nader, field office director for USCIS’ Bedford branch. “The simple reason is that the general public does not know the difference between ‘.gov’ and ‘.com,’ which is a public domain. The government owns .gov, and no one can imitate that. All USCIS forms are free.”…

…Community groups helping to prevent scams say immigrants in New Hampshire have been fleeced out of thousands of dollars. Cathy Chesley, director of Catholic Charities Office of Immigration and Refugee Services, said she has seen many victims.

“I know one family that’s out $7,000,” said Chesley. “Just gone.”…

…One example

One man accidentally let I-94 cards — temporary visas — for his entire family go through the laundry in his jeans, said Amy Marchildon, director of Services for Lutheran Social Services of New Hampshire. “He paid someone $2,000 to replace one card, and nothing happened,” she said. The legitimate cost of replacing an I-94 is $365.

One immigrant applied for the State Department’s lottery visa program, Nader said.

“This person worked with someone who said they would help her get the papers for the lottery. For months down the road, she received this email saying that she won the lottery and that the next step is you send me $2,500 money order and wire it this way,” Nader said…

…The person disappeared, and her $2,500 disappeared with them.”…

…Nader said individuals could report scams anonymously, by using the website uscis.gov, or by calling 1-877-382-4357… Read more here

I live near Harrisburg Pennsylvania and became involved with the refugee community there in 2010. I am deeply troubled by the victimization that they experience and would like to see more attention brought to it…most of it in the area on Green Street, but some in the area of Magnolia Hill (Thomas street off of Market). Robberies, assaults, and even entry into homes. It has them afraid to be outside. Some families have already fled the Green Street area…[since the police began investigating a group of teenagers] the problems haven’t gotten better…it’s probably the same…kids. Police don’t really help. However, the refugees are starting to think defensively. I’ve bought pepper spray for some of them and instructed them on its use.

Refugees who either have no credit history yet or whom resettlement agencies ruined their credit by reporting them to credit bureaus for unpaid travel loans can find it difficult to find jobs. That’s because employers practice credit history discrimination, and Chicago’s City Council is now taking a look at this practice. A lawyer with the Illinois attorney general’s office told the council’s Human Relations Committee that a troubled credit history has no relationship to poor job performance or theft on the job. Employers can also refuse to hire people for being unemployed – no questions asked. An article in the Chicago Tribune discusses a City Council proposal to prevent this sort of discrimination:

Rejecting Chicago job applicants because of credit history would be banned in most cases under a proposal a City Council committee endorsed Thursday…

…Under the city measure, applicants who believe they have been wronged can take the less costly and simpler route of filing a complaint with the city Human Relations Commission.

The proposal, put forward by freshman Ald. Ameya Pawar, 47th, also would ban employment ads that say the unemployed cannot apply.

“People have been discriminated against simply on the basis of credit history or for simply being unemployed, and as a result, qualified applicants are being denied jobs,” Pawar said. “Every job seeker, regardless of their credit history, deserves a fair shake.

“And this kind of discrimination has profound impacts on seniors, single-income households, immigrants, refugees and parents re-entering the workforce and finally veterans,” he said…

…A union representative, an employment coordinator for a human rights group and a lawyer with the Illinois attorney general’s office all told the council’s Human Relations Committee that a troubled credit history has no relationship to poor job performance or theft on the job.

The officials also cited studies that indicate about a third of credit reports contain errors… Read more here

There have long been some unsettling practices in the refugee travel loan segment of the US refugee resettlement program. This is yet another aspect of the program that never seems to be covered by the mainstream media, which seems to rely almost entirely on refugee resettlement agencies’ press releases for their coverage of the program.

For those who are unfamiliar, the US federal government covers refugee travel costs to the US via the International Organization for Migration (IOM) – the principal intergovernmental migration organization. As a condition of travel the IOM requires that refugees, before they depart to the US, sign promissory notes to repay the costs of travel via interest-free loans. The IOM, however, has not translated promissory notes in other languages, calling into question whether refugees understand what they are signing. In addition, refugee resettlement agencies earn a 25 percent commission for acting as collection agencies for the travel loans. Agencies have regularly failed to notify refugees of their right to a deferral and/or a write off – in the event of financial hardship – and fail among the various agencies to treat refugees the same. In aprtnership with the IOM they also fail to translate the bills that they send to the refugees.

Furthermore, and more astonishingly, the agencies often fail to take the most minimal steps to work with refugees to help them repay their loans, instead threatening the refugees with draconian measures for failure to comply with promissory note terms, For example the San Diego IRC office warns refugees, “failing to comply with the established payment schedule and terms will result in legal action to collect the amount past due and payable.” Its hard to understand how any of these practices comply with these organizations’ missions as humanitarian entities.

I wrote to the State Department’s refugee office about some of these practices in a series of letters back in 2005, but the office apparently did not take any constructive steps to resolve the problems (when the official I wrote to retired, however, she referred to her office’s “party-hard” habits, including various theatrical productions). In years past I also spoke with an IOM official and he laughed at me for supposedly trying to “make a cause” out of these questionable practices. Now, in a recent comment to our website attorney Zoe Ann Olson at Idaho Legal Aid Services, Inc. tells (see below) about her efforts to assist refugees in Idaho whom resettlement agencies damaged their credit by reporting them to Trans-Union. She’s looking for anyone who has successfully challenged the legality of these loans.

I had a telephone meeting with IOM Head of Office, Brian Graham. IOM is addressing all of Idaho Legal Aid’s travel loan cases directly with me. We found that the agencies were not offering refugees options such as deferrals and or write off of their travel loans and were not treating refugees the same among agencies.

IOM is creating a website with information about the travel loans and eligibility criteria for deferrals and write offs. I told him that I want standard guidance and all agencies must tell refugees the rules from the beginning before they sign a promissory note.

IOM will write off the travel loans with documentation for death, repatriation, bankruptcy, permanent disability (with a Dr’s letter saying the refugee is disabled and can’t work), minor orphans. Case-by-case for incarceration, victims of violence, domestic violence victims and documented financial hardship.

Received deferrals for temporary disabilities and documented under or unemployed.

IOM is going to correct the credit report of all of my clients that were reported to TransUnion for defaulting on their loans because the agencies did not notify them of their right to a deferral and or write off and thus should never have been reported. The issue of damaged credit is still outstanding.

I explained to them that families need to be able to make their own travel arrangements especially if it is cheaper, and translate promissory notes in other languages and the bills too.

They are going to provide better orientation on the travel loan in the refugee country and here with Title VI compliant services.

They are going to redo their computer system to better monitor travel loan collection practices.

I would like to know if anyone has successfully challenged the legality of said loan. The promissory notes are governed by DC law. To collect a debt in Idaho once in default, an entity has to show the person owes the debt and that the collector (IOM) has registered in the State of Idaho to collect a debt. Our clients’ loans have been deferred or written off. Now I am working on the deferrals—hoping to get more write offs and or reduced payments for disputed loans and or hardship. On April 19 and 20, I will provide a fair housing and travel loan clinics in Boise and Twin Falls.

Thank you,

Zoe Ann Olson
Attorney at Law
Idaho Legal Aid Services, Inc.

1-(208)-345-0106, extension 1508
Facsimile 1-(208)-342-2561
310 North 5th Street
Boise, Idaho 83702
zoeannolson [at] idaholegalaid [dot] org

Manchester Mayor Ted Gatsas is trumpeting the City’s low unemployment figures. He claims to believes in families but asks how unemployed refugees are going to support family members once they get here. I guess he hasn’t considered trying to help pair up any of those refugees with local employers looking for workers, and doesn’t realize that these people will still have to try to support their separated family members whether they stay trapped overseas in resettlement camps or resettle to other US cities (refugees from family reunion cases were reduced this year). An article in The Union-Leader has the mayor’s most recent comments about his refugee community:

GOFFSTOWN — Manchester Mayor Ted Gatsas spoke alongside Gov. John Lynch in a joint State of the State and State of the City event at Saint Anselm College Wednesday.

“I can tell you that the city is in great shape,” Gatsas said. “There’s a buzz, there’s a happening, people are enthusiastic about seeing the city and moving throughout the community, and that’s a good thing.”…

…Gatsas pointed to the city’s low unemployment rate, saying it’s an honor to go to ribbon-cuttings for new businesses on a weekly basis.

“That means people are looking to start a business here in this community, and they’re looking to hire,” he said…

…In July, the mayor made headlines when he called for a two-year moratorium on refugee resettlement to Manchester, a position he reaffirmed Wednesday.

“I’ve had refugees come up to me and say, ‘Mayor you’re right. We don’t have a job. We need to get a job first.’”

Gatsas said he believes in families, but when unemployed refugees are receiving family members here, “how are they going to support them once they get here?”… Read more here

Refugee workers at the Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport have worked in poor conditions while an airport contractor — GCA Services Group — allegedly used discrimination, threats and mistreatment to dissuade them in their efforts to join a union to bargain for basic benefits, such as health insurance and sick leave. Workers say that the City has ignored their poor work conditions. An article in The Arizona Republic has more:

Isabell Marquez said she tried for months to find another job after she was fired a year ago from her work as a janitor for a contractor at Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport…

Marquez, in her 50s, was one of four workers who claimed the company, GCA Services Group, fired them when supervisors learned they were trying to unionize.

Now, Marquez and her co-workers are celebrating her reinstatement — and a check for $8,462 in back pay…

Several of the GCA’s 200 workers at the airport allege they have faced discrimination, threats and mistreatment for their efforts to join a union that would fight for a contract with basic benefits such as health insurance and sick leave. Their claims recently were backed by the National Labor Relations Board.

The board issued a consent order in December that required GCA to re-hire and pay a total of $24,040 in lost wages to Marquez and her co-workers, Hamid Amiri, Yadu Rijal and Geoffrey Kachiolwa.

In addition, the board required GCA to promote another worker, Narayan Timsina, to a job he was initially denied and to give him $1,861 in back pay.

The board outlined the steps GCA must take to calm hostile relations with its workers, which include an end to policies that deter workers from unionizing and an end to threats for workers involved with a union…

… So far, GCA has not recognized workers who carry union cards, said workers’ advocates at Central Arizona for a Sustainable Economy, or CASE…

…CASE staff said GCA has exploited a vulnerable group in society: refugees who have few job options when they arrive in Phoenix. Many of them hail from politically unstable countries such as Afghanistan, Myanmar, Iran, Iraq, Sudan and Somalia, CASE staff said.

CASE said many of Sky Harbor’s service contractors tend to pay refugee workers low wages with few or no benefits while the city seems to ignore their poor work conditions.

Last week, CASE staff and 18 GCA workers brought a scroll filled with complaints about their working conditions to the Phoenix Aviation Department.

Department officials sidestepped the complaints… Read more here

In a letter of note from a former refugee resettlement agency director, she asks about concrete reform suggestions for the federal resettlement program:

 …I have worked for many years in resettlement in the US as well as with IOM and UNHCR abroad. I have read your blog and I agree with many of your points (not all) and appreciate many of the points you raise. I guess what I am trying to find is some concrete reform suggestions to the federal program? Maybe I’m just not seeing it there with all the other entries.

I think it is hard for most people working in resettlement to accept the criticism as they feel they are doing the best they can with minimal resources. I always felt resentful of PRM and the lack of funding as I spent my nights and weekends (unpaid of course) ferrying people to appointments, hauling furniture, etc. etc. only to then be attacked by people like you for not doing enough. That said…you are absolutely right to document these epic fails on the part of many agencies (mine…under my leadership absolutely included!). Yes the volags are underfunded, but at some point it cannot be an excuse and we need to have a real, fruitful dialogue about reforming what is a very broken system.

I’d love to hear your ideas for reform.

Many of the reform ideas are brought up in the daily posts on this blog, here are a few examples:

• Openness and transparency in the resettlement program (secrecy serves only to shield responsible parties from accountability). Program and financial audits should be posted on government websites.
• Enforcement of current federal government regulations and contract requirements
• An end to the “partnership” arrangement between refugee resettlement contractors and the government oversight agencies (its puts the two in bed together, eliminating authority in the oversight relationship, which is not good for refugees or the public)
• Consideration of crime rates when choosing resettlement sites
  
• Increased State Department monitoring/inspection visits (once in 10 years or more guarantees that problems will not be resolved, and the ORR appears to mainly rely upon over the phone “desk audits”
  
• Abandoning the fictional concept that resettlement contractors can oversee themselves (the State Dept. claims that the national resettlement agencies are neutral and effective inspectors of their own sub-contractors; state governments have handed over oversight responsibilities to federal resettlement contractors to oversee themselves as “state refugee coordinators”)
• Making government oversight agency inspections unannounced
• Ending the federal government oversight agencies’ reliance mainly on contractors’ records for performance evaluations (now State Department inspectors only speak to 3-4 refugee cases at each resettlement site to verify services, and monitors will not investigate any complaints from community members – they skip over those cases during inspections)
• Actual penalties for contractors who do not meet the minimum requirements of government contracts (no consequences means no accountability)
• Expansion of the quite minimal “minimum requirements” of the government contracts
• An end to the revolving door, which makes government contractors into government oversight people and vice versa
• Requiring refugee resettlement contractors to show the public what private resources they are actually contributing
• Refugees must never be required to sign any forms, including apartment leases, without an interpreter and a thorough explanation of what they are signing
• Refugee travel loan repayment bills must be in the refugees’ languages
  
• Currently there is almost no minimum standard for assisting refugees to find employment – resettlement agencies are not required to help the refugees find jobs (what about a some minimum standard such as three realistic job leads per month per refugee, and help with the job applications?)
• Also see our recommendations to the National Security Council