>> our efforts have been of great importance to me personally. i came to the department from the american bar association where i let the commission on immigration their and i work on detention issues including access to counsel and other detention conditioning issues. and i understand today's briefing is to help you consider equal protection and the administration of justice and are immigration detention facilities. my colleagues and i will address the standards which are identified as a subject of interest. in addition since this have been a part of that's come out i wanted to spend a moment to two other topics that we devote substantial resources, and this includes people with mental health issues or disabilities.

the language access, the department recognizes the responsibility to communicate in a language they can understand area district hires a permanent that to ensure effective communication. having interpreters available and having appropriate staff trained to use them and having the right policies and procedures in place for language access this means avoiding the line on those that are not qualified to provide interpretations and in the context of sexual assault prevention and response, when the stakes are especially high on the requirements of the department rule under this are very specific. we have this particular challenge in detainee spoken only in relatively small communities where commercial interpretation services are substantially more difficult to engage. and so it can't be termed a

translation of written materials. and this includes individuals with serious mental health conditions who are in our civil rights and civil immigration detention system. and the obligation to provide a appropriate accommodation to ensure that they can participate fully in the programs and services offered across the department including beds. in 2013 there was an issue on segregated housing that ensures regular review of all the long-term placements in a segregated housing unit. and a substantial additional requirement for regular review of detainees who have a serious medical or mental health condition or disability. and skipping a little bit on this topic i turn briefly to this and the isis attention standards. we finalize department wide

regulations to prevent and detect and respond to sexual abuse and assault in the dhs confinement facilities. while the dhs components have policies in place to prevent sexual abuse, the regulations created uniform effective safeguards against sexual abuse in i.c.e. and custody. my colleagues will discuss the implementation within this with in more detail. we operate a department wide working group to facilitate limitation where it is appropriate and we assist the components on various issues where we can. and this was also included in 2008 at 2011 performance-based national detention standards and it accomplishes this as well. we are also we are a competent additional requirements and we

have other assistance. i emphasize that we understand and we take seriously our responsibility to ensure not only that the right policies are in place and these standards are essential in real improvements over their predecessors and that we have the right mechanisms in place to create policy change when needed. the components have their own monitoring and inspection officers and program and it also provides another form of monitoring and oversight as well as recommendations on the practices and training. while we work across the department, a substantial share that we received and recommendations we make on the subject of unaccompanied children as the commissioner is aware, the united states experienced a humanitarian crisis last spring and summer and there are tens of thousands

in the immediate crisis we focus on getting those adults and children, many who had undertaken a dangerous journey into a safe and secure environment where they can be processed. and some children remained in the dhs custody for more than three days we undertook a significant government wide response to address the crisis which included the establishment of a unified quarter nation group that brought the assets of multiple federal agencies to bear on the situation. unaccompanied children are inherently vulnerable so we placed a high priority on identifying any protection concerns. unaccompanied children from contiguous countries that don't -- excuse me under the trafficking victim act of 2008 when dhs encounters a child from a contiguous countries such as

mexico, the child is screened to identify potential victims of human trafficking and they are returned to his or her own country. so we conduct this on all accompanied children are those of the country of origin. >> thank you. we will come back and ask you some questions. i promise. serve please go ahead. >> thank you distinguished members of the u.s. commissioner . i appreciate the opportunity to speak with you about the actions taken by the u.s. customs and border protection to implement the standards to prevent this and respond to sexual abuse and we refer to it as an establishment. and to highlight our efforts in this area and we are committed

to having prevented sexual abuse in all of our facilities. we have standards that are build on our prior policies and the previous standards became effective on may 6, 2014 ensure that appropriate mechanisms are in place to prevent and respond and in this includes a zero tolerance of sexual abuse policy which prohibits all forms of sexual abuse of individuals in custody, including doing transportation and immediately upon us they appointed as prevention of this to begin coordinating our efforts across the agency.

and that is where we have selected a permanent coordinator that will be joining the organization within the next two days. and we have enjoyed great support from all of our components across this. we have the office of border patrol, and internal affairs and they have all issued guidance for staff on the dhs standards and zero tolerance policies. and so in order to heal this is the key to the success of implement in the standards and enforce the standards. so this is developing training for all of the persons that have contact with detainees and to interact during this process of adults and minors. this will prevent and detect and respond to sexual abuse as well

as providing this communication with individuals who are victims of sexual abuse. and that includes allegations of mistreatment without fear of retaliation as stated in our policy and in addition to ensure that the detainees are able to report sexual abuse allegations to third parties posters were developed with all these holding facilities across the country and the telephone number of the officer of the inspector general. all of these must be reported in the joint intake, which is a dhs facility for taking in misconduct allegations managed by i.c.e. and cbp they have violated the disciplinary or elective action upon proof of

violation of two removal of federal service. and i welcome your questions and comments and look forward to continuing this dialogue will be considered to be the most pressing issue. >> i would like to thank the commission for discussing this responsibility for unaccompanied children. and today i would like to share general information about children in our custody as well as the standards of service and also discussing the final roll including responding to sexual abuse and harassment. we're talking about children who entered the united states unaccompanied by a parent or a legal guardian without immigration status, and usually

another agency gets above usually the department of homeland security. once they have identified a minor, they transfer the child by transporting them to one of the care providers. they currently have approximately 124 care provider facilities in 15 states. and in fiscal year 2014, they placed 57,496 children in the care provider facility and the vast majority of the children came from honduras and el salvador. children from mexico count for 2% of less than the total and all of the countries are less than 3% on federal agencies. the rapid breakdown has changed slightly from previous years and the increase of numbers and the number of children under 14 years of age. in previous years approximately

25% of the population was e-mail and it is made up approximately one third of the population. also in 2014 approximately 27% of the population was under 14 are sold. while in previous years the percentage was 17 to 24%. we have a network of care provider partners that provide therapeutic providers, presidential residential treatment centers, residential data providers transitional foster care and long-term foster care and a very small number of children are facing this if they have posed a danger to themselves or others. but the vast majority of children are housed in a sheltered facility, all permanent cure for writer's are licensed to provide residential services. this means that all of our care provider facilities are overseen

by licensing authorities and state licensing requirements cover everything from reporting allegations of sexual abuse to providing nutritious meals and snacks and the number of square feet at the children have in their room to the services they are providing and much more. when a child is referred to this from dhs orr has a responsibility. they will identify any special needs at the child may have and determine the best and most appropriate place for the child. and they use transitional foster care to help children under the age of 12 or those that are pregnant or parenting so that they can receive specialized care and services. and when the program has transferred from the former u.s. naturalization service to the

department of homeland security they became bound by the settlement agreement which set forth the minimum standards and services that might be provided to all unaccompanied children. they are tasked with providing the custody until a safe and will or is found for the child while the child works are immigration proceedings. while they are in the care, here she was used an array of services and state licensing standards. when a child is admitted to the care, the conduct screenings and interviews and interviews with potential sponsors and then determine whether the child has any immediate need or if they have been a victim of abuse or a crime or of trafficking. while children are in the care, each child receives an

additional medical examination and a medical and dental health services. and also the legal service screenings after some services which is something that we have been broadening recently. this includes regular telephone calls with family members, case management services and services with other appropriate sponsors and individual counseling session as well. we see this with a parent or relative or another appropriate sponsor and most children do have a parent or other relative already living in the united states and are ensuring that this is safe and suitable for the child, including background checks and responsibility to care for the child and the

child's well-being. huxley 90 >> approximately 90% are mandated and others become eligible for legal proceedings. finally i would like to discuss briefly all of our final rules that cover is standards to prevent and respond to sexual abuse and sexual harassment involving unaccompanied children. we have the final roll that took place on december 24, 2013 and is expecting public comment would 60 days. as a final goal, it became effective upon publication and that your provider facilities have six months to implement the rule and be in compliance. this will include a comprehensive set of standards organized into categories and covering topics such as training

and education reporting medical and mental health care and the standards include existing state and local laws and regulations and licensing standards. it applies to all facilities excluding secure care providers and individual foster care homes. all secure care providers are directed to follow the justice regulation and the individual foster care homes are subject to all of the policies and procedures and state licensing standards but they are not subject to this because they are a community-based organization. this includes the goal that will ensure care providers in taking all of the required staff in a formalized process to ensure the proper response to any allegations of sexual abuse and sexual harassment.

>> thank you. three chairman and members of the commission, thank you for the opportunity to discuss recent initiatives in immigration and customs enforcement. my name is kevin and i am the assistant director of the i.c.e. department of public planning. we were established to help to ordinate the efforts to help immigration. the national immigration detention system has expanded rapidly in the last 20 years. going from an average daily population of less than 7500 detainees to over 33000. and that includes 75 and 1995. that has resented challenges and in 2009 we announced a broad effort to reform this. the goal of this was to ensure that conditions would be consistent with the civil nature of immigration. we were established to spearhead

the initiatives, both long-term and short-term improvements and identifying long-term transportations with the priorities. and this includes more appropriate facilities for the population and improving conditions at existing solely as an reducing the number of people transferred away and ensuring that detainees receive adequate men medical health care and that the facilities receive necessary federal oversight. the commission has discussed to specific requirements in particular and this includes the implementation of dhs regulations. the 2011 standards are the must updated. to develop this, we must work with a variety of agency stakeholders including nongovernmental organizations and field officers.

this improves upon the safeguards and protections contained in earlier versions including additional medical and mental health services and increase access to legal services and religious advocating. and this includes stronger safeguards and stronger protections for vulnerable populations including women and individuals with mental illnesses. the currently applies to 60% of the average daily population including all i.c.e. facilities that house i.c.e. detainees which are known as dedicated detention facilities. for a facility to move to new standards we must execute contract modifications and this is a long process but we continue to pursue implementation of these standards with an additional

dedicated facility and having to house the largest populations. next i will discuss lamenting the regulations. prior to the issuance of the regulations, we develop strong safeguards against safeguards for abuse. it incorporates preventative measures such as detainment education as well as an effective response to all instances of sexual abuse. in 2000 and 12 they issued an agencywide direction on sexual abuse and assault prevention which is part of a zero-tolerance policy for all individuals and outlining the agency employees, it requires timely reporting of allegations and the coordinated response of investigation and the fact of monitoring of incidents. pursuant to the 2012 directive

i support this with our coordinator along with multiple coordinators in each field office and it also deploys comprehensive training on assault prevention and intervention are all employees that may have contacted and developed detainee awareness and education materials on sexual assault policies. and in march of 2014 as you heard we promulgated the regulations and this existing policy and practices outlined robust requirements for porting an investigation. we currently comply with all the dhs requirements and in may 2014, we updated the original directive on sexual abuse and assault prevention to incorporate several additional dhs requirements not already covered by the original policy. in september 2014 we also

promulgated a new policy to integrate requirements specifically applicable to this. in regards to these facilities, we were higher than all new and renewed or subsequently modified the silly contracts incorporate the standards and we also proactively pursue opportunities for ink incorporating the previous standards at other facilities including all the other dedicated facilities. at the current time all three of the family residential facilities and however it is important to note that the sexual assault safeguards contained in either of these apply to approximately 80% average in population. ms. goes to 95% of the average daily population one excluding those detainees held in u.s. marshal service contracted facilities which are covered by the department of justice

regulations. in the final note i would like to highlight. we refer to the recent directive on the use of segregation for detainees in this policy established procedures for oversight with the decision to place any detainee in housing for 14 days or more in this includes any length of time with special one abilities. this is reviewed on an ongoing basis by the offices as well as others. we also completed nationwide deployment of a new risk classification assessment and this will improve transparency and uniformity and classification decisions identifying horrible populations and prioritization of this resource. finally, we made great strides in reducing long-distance transfers of detainees by increasing detention capacity

where it is most needed and issuing a policy in 2012 that regulate what a transfers. this ensures that detainees can remain close to their families and also prevents disruptions to ongoing immigration proceedings and we continue to strive for additional reforms in these and other areas and we will continue to ensure that these facilities are safe and appropriate for the nature of the detained population. i would like to thank the commission again for an interest and for allowing me to provide this statement. >> thank you so much. i will try to make a list and call on everyone in an orderly fashion. and i would like to ask first questions for specific questions, and i appreciate your

testimony today and the efforts that your agency appears to be putting into this topic. but i am reminded of two years ago on military sexual assault we had a number of generals and admirals sitting where you're sitting on the first panel, all of whom told us the great things they were doing to prevent military sexual assault and after that issues continued to come to life with significant issues about men and women in uniform being abuse despite all of the purported policies and procedures a reporter plays. i'm a little concerned about that as well. it sounds great what you are doing but yet we continue to see that there are challenges that are being traced by the agency and complying with or enforcing these policies. you know i reference at the beginning that the complaint was filed by the national justice editor of the aclu and others

addressing this and i'm sure you saw this that it lists some appalling things that happened to unaccompanied children sexual abuse physical abuse, a series of things are not in keeping with who we are as a country and i would like to know what has been done by your agency or any of the agent is here to investigate these allegations. >> thank you, chairman. in the first half first my office takes these complaints seriously and we have work closely with regular meetings of nongovernment organizations in order to make sure that we are reviewing all of the complaints that are out there that we can gather and we visit this on a regular basis and i have made a priority of going to detention facilities as they are brought online and i staff will be here next week to review that facility and see how the conditions are there.

when we receive a complaint from an organization like this from ms. mccarthy or other organizations, we follow up with a person who sent the complaint and we ask any questions and we open investigations. so in the first half of fiscal 2014, for example, about half of the new investigation so we open or 71 out of 149 and we pertain to either i.c.e. detention or others. this includes other tech point and unaccompanied children. and we have a team of experts that are on contract with this including medical and mental health care and conditions of confinement and environmental health and safety in other areas and they come with us to the facilities and that includes how they pull files. we went to mexico last november and then this detention facility

in december. so this will be one of the largest facilities that we have visited. the experts met reports and we work with i.c.e. and we work with them to resolve issues that we found there. >> were you able to determine what these complaints if they were justified? they have corrective action taken? how does it relate to those other children? >> , i don't believe that our recommendations have been finalized. ..

>> we want to find out specifically what happens on those individual complaints. who does who does it go to the specific information about these allegations? >> i am not aware that any of our reports have been forwarded to cover that would be the only way i am aware information we report out on the annual report to congress is far more general we do a closed letter to individual complainants and so they we will get a close letter addressed to them specifically.

>> and your earlier remarks you talked about the anti-trafficking law and our border patrol is essentially for noncontingent -- noncontiguous and contiguous nations like mexico to figure out whether or not in the case of the unaccompanied children whether they had a fear of going back, a trafficking issue a hard time figuring out how a border patrol agent can make a determination that in most of these decisions is being done by immigration judgment in process. >> responsibility to five. >> anyone who had something to add. >> we screen for fear. a simple questionnaire that we

provided go through. if someone expresses of fear then under our law we are required to find a credible fear and then they have rights to not be returned. as i said in my remarks contiguous countries are one were -- ones where we screen initially. we screen them as a matter of policy. >> and as a matter of practice they are provided with a checklist to give the individuals their rights and the agent is not responsible for making or allowed to make an assessment. the individual indicates that he or she meets the requirements and must be referred for additional screening. >> and if they don't who makes the determination? >> the agent, based upon how they answer questions. the questions are, if you will, a series of questions that rise to the level of what we consider to be the standard for alleging

credible fear. depending upon that answer initially for citizens of mexico are i then returned to the mexican consulate. >> the agent makes the determination. >> the process and not the agent that answers. and if not the subjective agent determines the outcome >> that we asked mr. jones supply us with questionnaires. >> that would be great. >> i believe that i can. >> i would imagine it should not be privileged. i would be surprised if a document like that would be privileged. i'm sure we can work at a situation where you could provide that to us. >> it may well be perceived in terms of -- >> i just need the blackboard. see what kind of questions are being asked. >> i would add to my have a moment working with ice on

reviewing this. i don't know where that processes. i think it is searchable. >> it is a public forum. >> i appreciate that. recently we received a a number of complaints, copies of complaints that were submitted involving religious freedom submitted to us by the american arab antidiscrimination committee involving religious freedom. are any are any of you aware of these complex? >> it is very possible my organization has gotten the. >> what do you do when you receive these? >> i i can submit that within the time allowed but i don't know. >> before you leave i am going to hands is to you and make sure if you could please commit to take a close left.

these are significant and serious issues. i want to ask one thing we did not here from you all is important is the treatment of transgender individuals. it is our understanding of the largest agency that has custody of transgender individuals is the department of homeland security. could any of you talk about the treatment of transgender individuals in detention facilities? >> i can start with that. ice has been progressive in this area. i will try to remember all of the different areas. first off in our detention standards we require individualized assessments for any transgender detainees arriving at a facility regarding for example, their ideal housing placements, placements classification, decisions as to what housing units a place them in may not be

based solely on the biological anatomy of the individual must take into account that individuals gender identity. let me move forward. the actual apprehension process. i mentioned that they are screened. the officer enters information to various classification assessment tool which is part of our booking module and therefore is preserved electronically. the officer is required to ask a number of questions about a variety of special vulnerabilities. one is whether that individual may fear for their safety and attention due to their gender identity or sexual orientation. with with respect to treatment while in detention medical care standard guarantees a a right to hormone therapy for individuals who need for treatment and even in

facilities not covered by that standard we are vigilant on the issue to ensure that individuals receive necessary hormone therapy's. in our segregation which we mentioned the policy indicates that no one may be placed in segregation facilities due to the being transgender. we not -- we cannot have a default policy that anyone we will be vulnerable. vulnerable. there has to be an individualized assessment and there actually -- we immediately become aware when someone transgender is placed and look at those cases carefully. our statistics indicate that at any given time on average only one transgender detainee is in segregation in our entire system for

more than 14 days of the time. those are the statistics that i can i can recall most easily. we have special housing units in the los angeles area's dedicated to gay bisexual, and transgender detainees to for individuals who prefer a transfer unit across the country to that facility for their safety rather than being in general population housing and are afforded the opportunity. we have an ongoing working group in this area including adopting the most progressive policies. policies. there are a couple of jails in the entire country that have essentially transgendered committees. i think the acronym is pcc

if i'm not mistaken. i don't recall what that stands for. i community of healthcare providers, security staff and administrators in this case it might include policies which carefully consider the treatment options for transgender individuals. we are aware and respond to any concerns or allegations which we do here from time to time. >> thank you. i'm sure my colleagues will classify my questions. myself and some of my colleagues are planning to come and pay a visit. we would hope that we could ask for each of your assistance in facilitating a visit thank you. we appreciate that.

the documents we asked for, you can send those to our office. office. commissioner. >> thank you very much. thank you for your and holding this briefing. i have a question. i want to focus a little bit about the mandate that congress as to maintain a level 34,000's. i imagine that in policy and planning having to figure out a way to ensure that number affects not just whether or not you can physically do it but from a logistical.of view how is it that you get to that.? in other words, one of the

criticisms is that the actual number of violent offenders and violent as it real violence in these facilities is somewhere in the low teens or maybe even single-digit range's. as a criticism that in order to meet the mandate the department is reaching down, so to speak, to get people who may be -- have a a gui on marijuana or some other nonviolent offense. i don't want to put you on the spot but i guess i will i know that in a former life the homeland sec. janet napolitano went to congress and said we need need to deal with this quote the situation. i just want to no how does this quote i drive your department's policy and how would it be different, do different, do you believe, if that quarter were moved?

's. >> well, with respect to the question as to who is being apprehended and whether it requires us to apprehend individuals who are not priorities come as you may no in 2,011 director john norton issued priorities which is very recently been replaced by the department dhs executive action which clearly lays out the enforcement priorities for ice and is certainly not limited to people who have been convicted of violent crimes. it. includes people who have committed aggravated felonies of any type of people who have been convicted of three or more misdemeanors it's not counting misdemeanors such as traffic offenses people who have been convicted of at least one significant misdemeanor and then also certain types of immigration people who have received a

final order. so not necessarily criminals the people who have entered the country. statistics from prior years show that eyes was able to fill its detention beds with priority to the people who fell into one of the priority categories. a large percentage is going to be bordered crossers, especially during these years there is a massive influx across the rio grande valley of adults can adult individuals and it was difficult to find detention capacity during the height of those surges which were seasonal and many of those people do not have prior criminal convictions. our statistics have indicated that 97 percent at

times met one of these priorities or the detention was mandatory by law. with respect to quote a driving policies the administration has supported the 34,000 quota. congress expects -- congress appropriates resources with the pitching -- detention capacity in the specs wise to use those resources for that number of beds. i am not part of the enforcement and removal operations component which is responsible for apprehensions. it is the case that in recent years we have been able to more or less achieved that number notwithstanding fluctuations. by the end of the fiscal year the average typically has been around 34,000.

how they are able to arrive at that target's beyond the fact that they are working hard to comply with their enforcement priorities. >> thank you. thank you very much. this question is aimed at mr. jones. we heard a lot of criticism about the handling of persons coming over the border not just here, but here, but in other points as well. two questions. when you talk about this questionnaire part of me for lack of better what was left a little bit because you are asking questions about people may be letter probably not conversing in english.

my question is, how do you ensure that they fully understand what these questions mean in terms of what our objective standards are. the answers determine whether we do or not, but the facts seem to indicate that 83 percent of these folks are being sent home without a hearing, judge just based on being turned away. members seem high, and in the absence of knowing that their are culturally competent individuals present to be able to help deal with the translation by question-and-answer system, do you have that in place and how do you ensure that the answers you're getting a real? i can tell you that from my own experience doing with

asylum seekers sometimes you need to ask cultural is key to have issues. they afraid any answer they give to you we will be then communicated back to there home countries. how do your agencies deal with that issue. >> i think the chairman's question pertains to mexican nationals. all of the border patrol agent speak spanish i trained at the academy and are of hispanic descent and our 1st, second-generation americans as well. so while we cannot be

certain as to whether or not the person being interviewed is providing a truthful answer the agency changed to process the policy. that is the thing that we focus on as an agency, and we are consistent, fair, and assure, and assure that everyone is properly interviewed. >> do you have someone, for example, who understands country conditions in a a certain region of mexico, colombia venezuela guatemala, nicaragua the people their who could maybe provide a context for the answers. say, for example, this person, person, let's say they come from village x and would understand the subject of horrific cartel something like that. how do you determine the

cultural geographic, and i guess human context of what it is that they may be trying to express to an official of the government that they are familiar with. i think it is great that their are a high number of latino members but how do you ensure that they are really truly grounded in what it is that these people may be trying to communicate that may be afraid to communicate? >> at the executive level we no that the conditions throughout mexico at the individual agent level i cannot speak to that. what i can say is that they are trained to be consistent in terms of how we process people and to treat people

with dignity and respect. that is the core principle. they are understanding and a higher political and socioeconomic situations as to why people are coming to us, i can't speak to the individual assessment but i i can't speak to what we asked them to do. >> we can come back. >> thank you very much. questions for mr. jones commanded kind of follows up on the direction. it would appear that the customer and border officers are critical players in this immigration process. and and the screening and the selections in the training of those

individuals would be equally as important. talk about the selection the training's of your officers and the supervision that would go along with that and then i asked you to detail any problems that have arisen with accounts of disciplinary actions that have been taken or could be taken in connection with problems that arise. go ahead please. >> the selection process we advertise to border patrol agents probably twice a year. we have federal floor and terms of the number of border patrol agents we have

to have on duty. the number is 21364. this ratio of some kind. congress mandated we have a specific a specific number of border patrol agents on board always. so the majority of our turnover would be border patrol agents who are leaving to take over law enforcement positions primarily with ice if you will. we do a lot of training. but the selection process is vigorous in terms of the testing. structured interviews physical examinations for officers before they are hired. and upon hire our border patrol agents are attending basic training and have to successfully complete the academy's.

once assigned to the field they are put into a training program for the next two years and training supervisors are assigned to train the the next two years two years to be considered to have over two years to be considered fully trained. >> how many of your agents are fully trained? >> presently everyone is fully trained except those who are either in the academy were still in the training program. that number would be in the low hundreds at any given time because of the attrition rate and the backfill. so the number would be something we could find, but it is not something that we actively track. so so the next part of your question dealt with

performance and conduct issues. i would say that we have probably the same or similar rate of misconduct as you find in the general population. via the standard of conduct may apply to our office of internal affairs along with the office of the ig to investigate serious allegations of misconduct and in all instances all allegations are investigated if proven the corrective action is taken. >> thank you, mr. chairman. what determines detention? >> you mean who is it that decides to five. >> no, what factors that you hold the person and attention.

>> well, i mentioned the priorities from our established department policy. they make initial decisions regarding who championed. most apprehensions within the interior of the country the program. typically they apprehend people who have been convicted. >> of referring mostly to border crossings. it's. >> border crosses are typically apprehended, of course, cdp we usually border patrol. sometimes ports of entry.

they are put into her sent ties tries to take custody of. typically their in that proceeding. the tension is mandatory. they are able. an officer with us eis. there are always exceptions for humanitarian reasons. typically an adult apprehended at the border is placed in detention under an expedited removal proceeding. >> the amnesty type of claims, the people released from detention.

>> i don't have those numbers. >> we do have those numbers. >> i might have those numbers. >> can use secure those and send them to us? >> you're referring to people released after apprehension at the border. >> yes it's. >> pending a hearing on their status. >> typically if an adult were released after having been apprehended at the border it would only be because they have been determined to have effective other credible fear of persecution. >> i understand all that. it's mr. franklin -- jones sorry. zero-tolerance sexual assault policy have the same force of law? >> in terms of policy, yes. policy, yes. it is restating of the standard in the commission's

policy. so so reinforcing. >> for your private contractors of not adopted willingly. willingly. you have to negotiate that into a contract's. >> when you say private contractors. >> for the tension. >> we don't do detention, if you we will. we only hold individuals with the amount of time necessary to process them and transport them. in extenuating circumstances to five. >> does anyone on the panel have an answer to back. >> if you're referring to immigration detention facilities, that's right. regulations require that apply where detention facility contract is

assigned to a renewed its. the regulations do not have a clause about requiring them to be adopted. >> or contractors don't just comply with that until they are required to. >> well, a number of contractors of already been adopting prior to the contract negotiation for the technically standards and legally binding on those detention facilities until they are incorporated. >> do you no which ones are not volunteer to back. >> 95 percent of our facility population is covered. sexual assault safeguards our comprehensive and comparable.

>> do you no which contractors are not adopting those voluntarily? >> facilities are not typically too far to the extent to which they are trying to comply with standards in the absence of the contract modification is not something that we are always aware of. i would say that would be more likely to be the case for some of our larger -- >> see you don't no who does or two doesn't? >> i'm personally not citing that as an insertion. i don't mean to give you the impression i think it's happening. i don't know. know. i can tell you precisely how many facilities have contractually adopted it and precisely how many facilities have adopted a different detention standards and also with

respect to county jails that are used, they are also governed by doj regulations. i don't know how many of those county jails have chosen to comply with that. >> suffered an assault in a facility does it have the right to sue private contractor? >> i i can't speak to what legal rights they would have it's. >> another question. i have a couple others. >> during the influx the summer it was my understanding the government cold cities and counties and ask them to take as many as they could. are you aware of that? >> i don't think i understand the question.

we notified cities and counties when we were hoping opening or expanding facilities. >> i was can ask about when you get the children and place them in foster care or things like that. >> the foster care is actually funded. so their still in custody's. >> so do you run your own program? is it run through localities? >> now run through nongovernmental organizations not the stated county. >> if i can ask to with emotions of three or four children and said a have a relative of america endured

attending the mother and her three or four children if the mother wants can the children be placed with a relative pending her determination of attention? >> i would i would have to defer to dhs. [laughter] >> my understanding is that typically that does not happen. children would stay with the parent or parents with whom they cross the border. >> could it happen? >> i am not aware of it happening, but it is possible. >> i i have more questions. along the lines of the initial questioning involving contract facilities specifically for profit companies to take to

get dhs to terminate a contract with an agency that is deficient? >> the legal provision you are referring to is has been an appropriations love for many years. if a detention facility fails an inspection for two consecutive years that facility may no longer be used. we have several layers of oversight. we have withdrawn from facilities regardless of whether or not a failed one or more inspections the

violations were just conditions in general. >> other reports generated? >> the result in your determination to make. >> i don't know of any publicly available reports of when we have withdrawn from facilities but that is not necessarily because they failed to consecutive inspections. from my knowledge more often than not it is not because they have failed consecutive inspections but because of concerns that ice had. >> so if someone like us wanted to see the results of these inspections will we get that information? >> there are different types of inspections, as i said it's. those conducted by the office of retention oversight are publicly available on our website.

the annual inspections conducted as far as i know are not all publicly available. some of them have been. >> so that is where you suggest we get those? >> i don't know. to the extent that they are publicly available now, that's my understanding. it's quite possible. >> i think were going to request those. a those. a lot of information relevant to this investigation. the.of clarification, going to give you these documents. your office did initially make a response indicating that you are not going to take any further action. my my hope is that you we will take a closer look. is that a yes? 's access.

>> commissioner. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. >> i would like to more clearly understand the nature of the treatment of minors, both brought into custody, during custody and after release. and in particular could you explain how it is assessments are made about what kind of educational needs and/or special education needs that these children may have and how those needs are being fulfilled both while they are in custody and efficacy

and how you no. >> facilities are run by social workers. clinician and train staff. there there are number of assessments. we can share with you the various forms that were used in conducting the assessment >> i think we would like that. we do have a number for various issues such as trafficking or disability. subjected to trafficking or sexual abuse or crime we do home studies before we release them require services after their release

so to get a good picture's we are shortly hopefully today, possibly monday going to be posting a knew policy guide that talks about the care and the services of the children play in them we we will be able to provide all of the forms that go with that. what else can i tell you? obviously a number of kids is gone of greatly. we are thinking about ways to improve and increase the post- release not to be receiving the kind of services that he or she was deemed entitled to which they were entitled. the ability of someone might have to complain about that what is the procedure that one would pursue if one were

not receiving the services to which he or she was entitled's. >> the number of levels we are able to go and check. so we have our special field specialists. our federal staff. contracted care staff that check on the facilities as well as a facility staff and headquarters: headquarters: desk monitoring, site visits and monitoring the follow-up there are a number of levels command it is something that event director will be corrective actions. we are developing a new 800 number's that is easier for the children to access. but they also have many of the children have individual

attorneys, legal service providers that going to the facilities regularly, so their are a lot of people providing care and having an eye on out what is happening with the children in addition to just the facility staff. i recognize that their were not's -- these children and as other detainees are not entitled to the assistance of care fact that i promote is there any kind of group of trained advocates that provide a series of core supports for these detainees >> we have a number of

programs in the works right now. we have a contractor that does go around and provide presentations for the children. we have a video that was recently developed that has the information command we have recently started a grant in specific states to provide actual direct service to the children because it is not required by statute, but one of our goals is to increase the individual representation for children. we have -- i think by this summer we should have a new request for proposals out for legal service providers to come in and applied to provide legal representation for the children. >> any of you have any direct impact on the's judicial judges who make the ultimate determinations about asylum and other topics?

our role the chair to have the care of the children. the immigration judges or hearings. >> the immigration courts within the department of justice. >> is their training that they receive a your best or do you provide them with any kind of overview information about the nature of the phenomena we are experiencing here? >> i'm actually not sure to what extent there is communication or provision

beyond what would typically be happening in the course of education where attorneys are regularly interacting with immigration. that is something i would be happy to collect. >> thank you. they you. they have 15 minutes left and this is the order of the next question. vice chair and the director. >> thank you very much. i'm not quite sure exactly what your purview is but the question i'm asking is followed up with the commissioner and chairman were talking about to what extent do we require as a matter of law and contract that the protections that someone would be afforded in the federal facility or that a private facility as well. and, i mean not just. the training, access to

records for inspections that apply to federal agencies'. what what is it that we require as a part of our contract that people we sent to these private for profit institutions are afforded at least the same kind of rates and protections as they would if they are housed in a federal facility. >> i don't want to try to start the question. i will say kind of as a header to what his response might be that there is not a a difference in the type of standards that apply. you know he already responded to you about not being aware of the legal obligations of the contract but they apply their standards across the board to facilities. >> are federal detention standards are established

federal government requirements for all of the private contractor facilities adhere to the most recent and rigorous level of the detention centers. in those and those standards are intended to apply robust safeguards across the board. we we do consider that federal policy and agency policy which is applied to private contractor facilities through contractual modifications which has occurred in all instances. >> everyone is undergoing. laws that govern the treatment of prisoners detainees federal versus a private. >> right. well, with respect to private contractor facilities as they are all

governed recent detention centers. bold out their are governed by most recent detention centers. it is it is not immediately applicable to private contract facilities which is the same for the department of justice private contractor facilities as well. as i mentioned regulations or more rigorous in terms of its requiring quicker application. there is also a commitment that has been made in the preamble that regulations will be applicable or for that we will endeavor to make regulations applicable and are dedicated facilities which include private

contractor facilities within 18 months of the effective date. >> could you please send to us a list of which facilities list of which facilities georgia not do i do not have as part of the contract? >> basically on the same topic. >> turn your makeup. >> the process facilities that are under contract. i'm assuming these facilities are compensated. you have to increase the compensation. but the facility is free to begin to implement or maybe even do it entirely for the contractors actually

renegotiate such that their may be facilities that are implementing partially or fully the new standards even if they are not yet renegotiated contracts. >> that's correct. and we have have been told by a larger private contractor companies in terms of those that operate more facilities, they facilities, they have been undergoing and have been undergoing its to implement the requirements in advance of the contractual modifications, but it is not legally and contractually binding. you are right, we might have to address additional compensation under the contracts. >> the speed at which the contracts are negotiated. are you waiting for something?

is it just a question of doing it as quickly as you can? >> contracts are renegotiated or modified and beyond that we we will not require the implementation. >> you are working on in other words. >> yes it's. >> vice chair of the staff director. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> i want to get back to the rgb question, talking about segregated housing the los angeles facility i think that was for transsexuals. >> gay, bisexual, transgender individuals. >> i have envisioned.

>> well, we don't consider that segregated housing. what is referred to in most facilities as a segregation management unit which is often referred to as solitary confinement's in which individuals are house in individual cells. the housing unit i refer to is not that. it has the same features of any other general population housing unit within the housing unit opportunities to co- mingle. it is it is just that they are separate from the rest of the population in order to ensure there own protection. with respect to people transferred into the housing unit it is voluntary.

>> is now like a 23 hour and a a indoor one hour and a outdoor facility for more like a prison as opposed to a county jail. >> is the same requirements that apply to the general population as any other. they are not confined to cells. so they move freely about. in terms of outside recreation i don't know how many hours they have. >> and do you do this for all lg bt people? >> not at all. within the los angeles field office. >> without trying to get at is how do you treat lg bt and not just transsexuals? there must be if you talk about transsexuals are talking about a small number of the project new line lg

bt we may be talking about a larger number. >> probably. we known as people their sexual orientation or gender identity unless they wish to come forward and indicate for some reason. >> is there a reason that you don't ask? >> up until now it was felt that it should be up to the individual to volunteer if they have a particular need which might be a medical leave your concern about one's own protection. >> do you think maybe -- and i don't know, just asking they may want to conceal it for any particular purpose from the authorities and not ask for assistance? >> yes, and up until now if that is the case ice would respect their wishes.

>> thank you. >> just one more question. you mentioned solitary confinement in your statement. do you recall that? >> i believe i said segregated housing. >> and then you said's that was for people and i did not understand that. he goes to the housing commanding you said their regular checks of those people. >> again you are fortunate. fortunate. mr. landi is the expert in this area. it's i can look and see if i can find what i said. >> i actually have it here. it says the department has taken many important steps to acknowledge the vulnerabilities.

civil immigration detention to detainees with disabilities to ensure that they can participate fully in the programs and services offered across the apartment 's including detention. for example, 2013 ice issued a directive often called solitary confinement regular review of long-term placements and special housing units that have substantial additional requirements for initial regular review of detainees and special housing a serious medical and mental health condition disability. >> and so that is something that mr. landi worked long and hard on that is the director that require certain procedures' end review be in place for people who aren't housing for 14 days or longer wearing these particular categories anyone with a serious medical or mental

health. >> what i'm trying to get at is again these people placed in solitary's by themselves all they or are they allowed to walk around and makes in the yard and things like that? that was not clear to me. >> this is a hallmark. this is a hallmark of most adult attention correctional facilities. typically in segregated housing individuals are housed in their own cells and opportunities for co- mingling are limited and in some cases probably in most cases in segregated housing someone does not have the opportunity to co- mingle. they have the opportunity to communicate but are not physically in the same place. segregated housing is typically for one of two reasons a form of

discipline for people who have committed serious disciplinary infractions'. an adjudication by the facility that person has been found guilty or for the safety and security of either other detainees staff, or the individual himself or herself. >> commissioner, i'm sorry the vice chair. it's. >> thank you very much. you are indeed a prominent fellow today. it is clear from all that has been said that our government relies very heavily on private prisons. we rely heavily on them .__but contracts with one of these private prison companies how is it that the government determines what is a sufficient per diem rate in order to ensure these detention conditions these detention facilities

satisfy the current enforceable standard. >> that is part of the contract negotiation process. those in office that works with the proponent to the proponent's and request statements and other information regarding whatever the facility are contractors claiming his costs to be, those are reviewed. there is often negotiations regarding the reasonableness and then a determination on a final rate which is typically different than what was originally requested. >> after that process is completed is there any monitoring to ensure that

the proportions of the money or the per diem rate is being allocated toward services for the detainee and in the overall condition of the facility? 's. >> there are several layers of oversight specifically with respect to the contract, the contract mechanism provides that there is a contract officer representative on site responsible for ensuring that all aspects are complied with its. typically there are a number of provisions. provisions. in terms of the compliance admits and mentioned that their are several different types of inspection programs the annual inspections against standards as well as on-site detention monitors which a place in a large number of facilities that

are full-time its. those are full-time on-site monitors. rigorous oversight for detention standards compliance. they are required to be checking the contractor's performance against requirements of the contract itself. >> thank you. we will close the questioning of this panel. >> unaccompanied minor capabilities. they capabilities. they are responsible for reviewing the application and approving it but it is the dependency court judge that has to ensure upon adjudication of the appropriate language is included that we will allow for the application to then be submitted for review and approval. are you aware of how many unaccompanied minors have been found

eligible for an application? if so, so, how can we get that information? to >> >> to ensure that day

understand what should be considered and what can be provided. >> i think cis is doing a treatment for judges images started to print out regional for our representatives on all that we work with and they're starting to reach out as supreme court judges. >> we appreciate the the panel now we will transition to a panel member to so we can begin to work her way up [inaudible conversations]

they're calling the meeting back into order for the continuation of our briefing on the condition of immigration detention centers and the current state of the children who came to us this summer as refugees seeking asylum in our communities throughout the u.s.. the panel will be presenting on a number of topics we have been talking about this morning as well but also we will elaborate on work they are conducting saliva like to swear in the panel. the first is the staff attorney with the mexican-american educational fund the second is associate director for advocacy at american immigration lawyers

association in the third is the director policy for human rights campaign and raise your right hand or swear that the information about to provide is true it accurate to the best of your knowledge and belief. is that correct? >> the afternoon commissioners. for the mexican-american and legal defense with this briefing today it is national civil-rights organization that has community ought reach a and the unnecessary litigation in. with this civil-rights of latino immigrants in the united states remains a core

priority. as the chair said ivan staff attorney and today i will be focusing specifically on the allegation of sexual abuse at the detention facility located in texas. first-ever like to emphasize that family detention is not the status quo in the united states. it is a relatively new phenomenon that has controversy and abuse as you have heard and will hear today. last july price and customs enforcement reacted to an influx of immigrants at the southern borders by flooding existing facilities to fairly detention centers for women and children under the age of 17. before that there was only one family detention center

in u.s. and today there are three. when carns opened the doors texas attorneys worked to coordinate programs services for the women and children that were detained and almost immediately began receiving complaints about conditions and sexual abuse at the facility. in addition to the university of texas school of law and immigration clinic the refugee protection program with human-rights first and there was a demonstrated complaint sent to the department of romance security and on september 20th summarizing allegations and the conditions that we heard about at the facility.

was abuse allegations or exploitation of for verbal whitman by security guards and staff such as removing women from their cells to shoot engaged in sexual contact in different parts of the facility than attempting to cover up the contract after the fact calling the detainee's girlfriend in requesting sexual favors for many and also with pending immigration cases and sometimes even shelter if they were released and also fondling or groping to in front of others including children. the present rate elimination act calls for any sexual conduct with the tvs in their custody.

with sexual abuse harassment in the hostel and unsafe working redivivus violates federal law in also suggest that detainee's to conditions that our punitive under the due process clause of the fifth amendment we receive formal responses from ice and the office of civil liberties october 29 and on december 4th respectively stating that investigations are ongoing also that our understanding the office of inspector general was conducting an investigation that we've done all it is still pending or the outcome but regardless the federal response has been woefully deficient under the prea pre-a couple -- protocol. some witnesses and victims have either been deported are released on bond

eliminating to investigate in the participation one of the detained women reported this contact but no walk action has been taken to stop or prevent the abuse instead it is our understanding least three of the employees who allegedly in caged are still employed at the facility and still have their jobs today. as recently as december 1st to enforce the warden of the facility is in the private company that operates the facility provided public testimony to the commissioner court stating those allocations were unfounded and they were

completely unfounded even though precisely those days we received a communication from the federal government stating that the investigation was ongoing. and putting women and children at risk we respect his commission recommend the proper implementation as a provision monitoring of the prea protocol as submitted to this commission this is exactly why family tension does not work. the fact that sexual abuse occurs or likely occurred in this potentially still occurring showing policy is not in place are not properly supervised or monitored or implemented. in the rush to the cave families the federal government has failed to protect the health and safety of women and children. instead of causing detention

figuring out what needs to be done differently and better the government has pushed to expand. thank you for your time today and i welcome your questions. >>. >> on behalf of the american immigration lawyers association of banks to the commission for holding this briefing and inviting us to speak. with the issue of immigration detention i.m. pleased to hear he will visit detention facilities that would encourage you to use the practitioners have volunteer members that are on the ground there to provide information that you need.

the administration recent massive expansion of asylums seeking mothers and children many still breast-feeding infants is a humanitarian disaster that violates fundamental due process rights and civil rights of hundreds of families who have fled violence from the northern triangle region of central america by the middle of next year the administration will detain nearly 4,000 children and mothers a 40 fold increase for families beginning in july of last year members from across the country responded to urgent needs for a complete lack of representation that was built after the search by

traveling at their own expense to the middle of nowhere is new mexico even working between 18 or 20 hours a day and volunteers were barely able to meet the demand for legal help and i would note the new detention facility will have far more detainee's. the project still continues to represent families who have been the team to inner now being held for filing have time to make a few remarks i hope i can channel the passion of our volunteers as well as the pain of the client. first want to focus briefly

on who these detainee's are. the vast majority that are held our asylum seekers who qualify for protection under international law. that is to they are. we know this because the immigration counsel project has won 14 out of 15 asylum hearings on behalf of these women and we know this because in the first month covey ngo to work 80 percent of the women ever in the facility had already expressed a fear of returning to the home country. the reality is family detention incarcerates with policy specially designed to make release as difficult as possible and deportation of the most vulnerable individuals of asylum seekers to have a legal

obligation to protect. is also important to know where the half of the detainee's our children. the average age was just six and half years old and there is currently a 20 day old child. not only is the detention of children wrong but it is in the narrowest circumstances unlawful pursuant to a settlement agreement that is still enforced for litigation. second i want to be more concrete the way family detention deprives detainee's of due process. it rushes individuals through the expedited process that results didn't legitimate claims falling through the track -- the?

despite the fact they cannot adequately communicate from government officials and if it is necessary and appropriate in the detention of anyone without the individualized assessment but to send a message to other people in another country does not begin to comply with the due process limits to take away someone's liberty. and family detention undermines access to legal counsel. across the board attorneys who have served clients is an artesia report serious obstacles to communicating with a and advocating on behalf of the clients. and let's be clear the massive outpouring of pro bono assistance we have seen with artesia resulting in

asylum in victories is not sustainable are easily replicable especially with facilities that will have 2,400 beds and kearns is doubling to over 1,000 beds. there is no way to provide adequate representation for these detainees and without counsel or a judge to run as quickly as possible through the system there is no meaningful opportunity to seek protection. period. i have included a list of recommendations that i urge the commission to consider but first and foremost, is to bring an end to family detention. thank-you i look forward to your questions. >> and i a m. the affair

director from the largest civil rights organization working on lgbt quality. on behalf of 1.5 million members i am speaking today about the immigration detention facility. i will add the at the white house for hate crimes so i apologize for leaving slightly early. first to be pliable to abuse in institutional settings and the departed:security implementation of prea is not adequate and falls short of the objectives and detainee's should not be based on administrative segregation or stay at facilities better and save with gender identity. i'll share the recommendations for this commission when i am through.

lgbt are vulnerable to abuse when they enter institutional settings. the bureau of justice former prisoners survey said homosexual and bisexual men report 10 times the rate of victimization by another inmate compared to the street in may's. but statistics are worse for transgendered. 24% of state and federal prisons were victims of abuse by an inmate in 16% by a staff. the united states has an obligation to protect against inhumane treatment or punishment. the most recent recommendation calls of united states to implement appropriate measures in the detention centers. with an alarming rate of violence congress enacted

prea in 2003 the department of all land security promulgated its own rule in march 2014 unfortunately it failed to adequately protect lgbt persons into examples provide greater clarity. while duty regulations mandate they have the obligation to shower separately limited this by adding a vague and a qualifier win feasible. follow mandates for housing solely on physical anatomy the rules require that they consider the detainee's under gender sell but indication of with the department of justice says their own views with respect to his or her own safety shot be given serious consideration. too often with the goal to

protect tranced gendered detainee's studies have shown no punitive segregation could cause physical into emotional harm. i did issue a new directive this was a last resort not of the norm but not only to take implementations seriously that many felt it was the untenable choice when fearful of their own safety to speak out of segregation. in addition to the directive to make progress of the detainee's to protect them from assaults with a performance based standards unfortunately implementation has been slow in in addition to identify claims of sexual violence including monetary

compensation. paul the for those to be in place for reporting assaults the policy changes that would address the needs of the lgbt but to that end to urge the chess -- to work with the detainee's but to fully implement the standards that all facilities with the facilities in to take them in a timely manner using limited resources with chairman's gender should not be a priority except with serious public safety concerns. da task categorizes home confinement and community-based supervision

even for those subject to mandatory custody oftentimes it keeps them from other facilities to help the commission will use this briefing if necessary to understand the challenges as they work to increase accountability accordingly edges specifically investigate reports of sexual assault and violence of lgbt detainees including unsubstantiated obligations as well as those taken to protect those detainee's from harassment. the commission and should ask you just from progress was includes improved training to identify

stirrers screenings inappropriate placement and separate shower access and consideration the status of reviews the commission to have a written response on the status from the 2004 gao report from the confinement facilities it received a copy of the draft report of all recommendations except one mr. chairman thank you for the opportunity to testify today we appreciate your looking into this and we hope your recommendations will help improve the situation for other detainee's. thank you. >> were you here this morning when i ask the question about lgbt i was given an answer they have a

facility by los angeles? >> was not here this morning. >> i ask the gentleman whether they ask people in the time into the country if they are lgbt and he said no. should the government disclosed there is a facility for lgbt people in the governmental system to those people or how should they approach these issues? >> for the privacy of lgbt people is relevant here merely asking people is not problematic from our perspective whether they are required to air disclosed is a different story but given

them options how they are detained this is something to take a look at. some have greater concerns of their safety that is why the prea standards are more desirable them better than what do you just use is giving serious kitty consideration for their perceived risk. >> you have no disclosure to say that they have this facility leave that to the detainee? >> i think that is right. to look at how that is phrased so people understand they have privacy concerns they are not required to disclose. >> and though statistics

were not detention centers? >> no. >> and how would you change that? >> i don't think there is a workable way especially with of population because they come from backgrounds of horrific violence and exploitation before the system that is currently in place devolved limited children who came into this country were often monitored electronically and that system worked just fine. that they are currently being detained without consideration whether not they pose a threat to the

community or a flight risk. >> you will just use electronics? >> there is a much less restrictive alternative to family based detention. >> we see with min on bond for sponsors and the community until they are resolved. >> give women and children have no family in the state's high do they support themselves pending resolution? >> i cannot speculate but i am certain after speaking with them on the ground they would much prefer to be in the community to have public schools to be the outside of

prison like setting. >> so they would find a way? >> they all do. >> so to facilities and if we were to choose one which would be the best? . .