Recommendation: To better address current and future staffing needs, the Director of EOIR should develop and implement a strategic workforce plan that addresses, among other areas, key principles of effective strategic workforce planning, including (1) determining critical skills and competencies needed to achieve current and future programmatic results; (2) developing strategies that are tailored to address gaps in number, deployment, and alignment of human capital approaches for enabling and sustaining the contributions of all critical skills and competencies; and (3) monitoring and evaluation of the agency's progress toward its human capital goals and the contribution that human capital results have made toward achieving programmatic results.

Agency: Department of Justice: Executive Office for Immigration Review
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In December 2019, EOIR officials told us that EOIR is continuing to develop an agency-wide strategic plan that will address workforce planning, among other issues. In addition, EOIR completed a review of the Office of the Chief Immigration Judge workforce in October 2018, which resulted in a new organizational structure and staffing plan for each court. According to EOIR officials, the staffing plan addresses and mitigates gaps and updates position descriptions to more clearly define roles and responsibilities. To fully address our recommendation, EOIR needs to continue to develop, and then implement, a strategic workforce plan that addresses key principles of effective strategic workforce planning. Once this strategic workforce plan is completed, EOIR needs to monitor and evaluate the agency's progress toward its human capital goals.

Recommendation: To better address EOIR's immigration judge staffing needs, the Director of EOIR should: (1) assess the immigration judge hiring process to identify opportunities for efficiency; (2) use the assessment results to develop a hiring strategy that targets short- and long-term human capital needs; and (3) implement any corrective actions related to the hiring process resulting from this assessment.

Agency: Department of Justice: Executive Office for Immigration Review
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In April 2017, the Attorney General approved a revised Immigration Judge hiring process. As part of the development of the revised process, the Office of the Deputy Attorney General, in consultation with EOIR, assessed the immigration judge hiring process, identified opportunities for efficiency, and proposed changes to the hiring process that address those opportunities. In December 2019, EOIR officials told us that EOIR is continuing to develop an agency-wide strategic plan that will address the immigration judge hiring process, among other issues. To fully implement our recommendation, EOIR will need to continue to improve its hiring process by developing a hiring strategy targeting short- and long-term human capital needs.

Recommendation: To help ensure that EOIR meets its cost and schedule expectations for ECAS, the EOIR Director should document and implement an oversight plan that is consistent with best practices for overseeing IT projects, including (1) establishing how the oversight body is to monitor program performance and progress toward expected cost, schedule, and benefits; (2) ensuring that corrective actions are identified and assigned to the appropriate parties at the first sign of cost, schedule, or performance slippages; and (3) ensuring that corrective actions are tracked until the desired outcomes are achieved.

Agency: Department of Justice: Executive Office for Immigration Review
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: As of April 2019, EOIR reported that it had selected the EOIR Investment Review Board as the ECAS oversight body with the EOIR Office of Information Technology directly responsible for the management of the ECAS program. Since that time, EOIR has shared documents with us that, according to EOIR, collectively serve as its oversight plan for ECAS. In particular, in January 2020, EOIR provided a copy of its Investment Review Guidance, a document that outlines the process, roles and responsibilities, and criteria it uses to assess selected IT investments, including ECAS. EOIR also provided documentation illustrating assessment of the ECAS investment performance towards expected schedule and benefits, and identification of areas where performance was not deemed very good or excellent. However, the documentation EOIR provided does not assign corrective actions to appropriate parties or establish how EOIR is monitoring program performance and progress toward expected costs. To fully address this recommendation, EOIR should document and implement a plan that describes how the EOIR Investment Review Board and OIT will oversee the full implementation of ECAS, including how these bodies will, consistent with best practices for overseeing IT projects, monitor program performance and progress toward expected costs; assign corrective actions to the appropriate parties at the first sign of cost, schedule, or performance slippages; and ensure that corrective actions are tracked until the desired outcomes are achieved.

Recommendation: To provide further assurance that EOIR's use of VTC in immigration hearings is outcome-neutral, the Director of EOIR should use these and other data to assess any effects of VTC on immigration hearings and, as appropriate, address any issues identified through such an assessment.

Agency: Department of Justice: Executive Office for Immigration Review
Status: Open

Comments: In December 2019, EOIR modified its case management system so that users must manually select the hearing medium type--telephonic, VTC, or in-person--when scheduling a hearing. In February 2018, EOIR also reported that it initiated a pilot project to collect data on Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) appeals in which the use of VTC formed some basis for the appeal. These efforts should provide EOIR more complete and reliable data it can use to assess the effects of VTC on immigration hearings. To fully address this recommendation, EOIR should analyze the data it collects through the change to its case management system and through its collection of data on appeals in which the use of VTC formed the basis for the appeal, analyze those data to assess the effects of VTC on immigration hearings and, as appropriate, address any issues identified through such an assessment.

Recommendation: To better assess court performance and use data to identify potential management challenges, the Director of EOIR should update policies and procedures to ensure the timely and accurate recording of Notices to Appear.

Agency: Department of Justice: Executive Office for Immigration Review
Status: Open

Comments: In January 2020, EOIR officials reported that the agency was taking steps to implement electronic filing of Notices to Appear which they anticipated would ensure the timely and accurate recording of Notices to Appear. At that time, EOIR officials estimated that it would take 2 years to implement electronic filing of Notices to Appear at all existing immigration courts. In the interim, to fully implement this recommendation, EOIR should update its policies and procedures to better ensure the timely and accurate recording of Notices to Appear.

Recommendation: To better ensure that FBI whistleblowers have access to recourse under DOJ's regulations should the individuals experience retaliation, and to minimize the possibility of discouraging future potential whistleblowers, the Attorney General should clarify in all current relevant DOJ guidance and communications, including FBI guidance and communications, to whom FBI employees may make protected disclosures and, further, explicitly state that employees will not have access to recourse if they experience retaliation for reporting alleged wrongdoing to someone not designated in DOJ's regulations.

Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In response to our report, in December 2016, Congress passed and the President signed the FBI Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2016, Pub. L. No. 114-302, which, among other things, provides a means for FBI employees to obtain corrective action for retaliation for disclosures of wrongdoing made to supervisors and others in the employees' chain of command. Following this, the FBI worked closely with the Department of Justice's Office of Inspector General (DOJ-OIG) to develop a training that clearly identifies to whom FBI employees may make protected disclosures. In addition, the FBI issued an aligned policy directive and two fact sheets detailing whistleblower rights. In October 2018, a DOJ official reported to us that the department was in the process of updating its regulations and, in February 2020, DOJ officials confirmed that the updated regulation was in the departmental clearance process but they could not provide an estimate for when it would be finalized. As a result, as of February 2020, DOJ's regulations have not been updated and are inconsistent with the current statute and FBI's guidance and training; as such, the problem of unclear or conflicting guidance to FBI employees still needs to be addressed. To address this recommendation, DOJ would need to update its regulations and ensure that all relevant guidance is clear and consistent across the department.

Recommendation: To further improve agency controls that help prevent payments to participants whose incomes exceed eligibility limits, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Administrator of FSA to implement a process to verify that accountants' and attorneys' statements accurately reflect participants' incomes as reported on income tax returns and supporting documentation or other equivalent documents.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: The U.S. Department of Agriculture agreed with this recommendation at the time of our report but, as of April 2020, has not acted to implement it because of the sensitive nature of questioning accountants' and attorneys' professional judgment. However, we believe doing so would reduce the potential for improper payments supported by taxpayers and would be an appropriate action for the agency to take.