Border Patrol: Checkpoints Contribute to Border Patrol's Mission, but More Consistent Data Collection and Performance Measurement Could Improve Effectiveness
GAO-09-824
Published: Aug 31, 2009. Publicly Released: Aug 31, 2009.
Skip to Highlights
Highlights
The U.S. Border Patrol, part of the Department of Homeland Security's Customs and Border Protection (CBP), operates checkpoints on U.S. roads, mainly in the southwest border states where most illegal entries occur. As part of a three-tiered strategy to maximize detection and apprehension of illegal aliens, Border Patrol agents at checkpoints screen vehicles for illegal aliens and contraband. GAO was asked to assess (1) checkpoint performance and factors affecting performance, (2) checkpoint performance measures, (3) community impacts considered in checkpoint placement and design, and (4) the impact of checkpoint operations on nearby communities. GAO work included a review of Border Patrol data and guidance; visits to checkpoints and communities in five Border Patrol sectors across four southwest border states, selected on the basis of size, type, and volume, among other factors; and discussions with community members and Border Patrol officials in headquarters and field locations.
Recommendations
Recommendations for Executive Action
| Agency Affected | Recommendation | Status |
|---|---|---|
| United States Customs and Border Protection | To improve the reliability and accountability of checkpoint performance results to the Congress and the public, the Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection should establish milestones for determining the feasibility of a checkpoint performance model that would allow the Border Patrol to compare apprehensions and seizures to the level of illegal activity passing through the checkpoint undetected. |
In our review of Border Patrol traffic checkpoints, we found, among other things, that the Border Patrol had developed some useful measures of checkpoint performance, but the agency lacked a model or method that would allow the agency to compare the number of apprehensions and seizures made at the checkpoint to the level of illegal activity passing through the checkpoint undetected. The lack of this information challenged the Border Patrol's ability to measure checkpoint effectiveness and provide public accountability. We recommended that the Border Patrol establish timelines for determining the feasibility of such a checkpoint performance model. On February 23, 2011, Border Patrol reported that the agency had recently awarded a contract to the Department of Homeland Security Center for Excellence to study checkpoint performance, including developing a checkpoint performance model. In June 2013, Border Patrol reported provided documentation showing that the agency had considered the checkpoint performance models proposed by the National Center for Border Security and Immigration--the DHS Center for Excellence--but determined it is not currently feasible to use the proposed models due to cost prohibitions and other factors. This action is responsive to the intent of our recommendation to study the feasibility of a checkpoint performance model.
|
| United States Customs and Border Protection | To improve the reliability and accountability of checkpoint performance results to the Congress and the public, the Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection should establish internal controls for management oversight of the accuracy, consistency, and completeness of checkpoint performance data. |
In our review of Border Patrol traffic checkpoints, we found inconsistencies in the way field agents collected and entered performance data into the checkpoint information system. As a result, data reported in the system were unreliable. We recommended that Border Patrol establish internal controls to ensure the accuracy, consistency, and completeness of checkpoint performance data. In October 2009, the Border Patrol reported internal control solutions were underway, which would primarily involve upgrading its existing checkpoint data systems and creating a checkpoint data oversight protocol. Also in October 2009, Border Patrol issued a memorandum specifying which data fields agents should use to indicate that an enforcement activity occurred at a checkpoint (or on a circumvention route, for apprehensions), and, in January 2010, Border Patrol issued an additional memorandum on checkpoint data integrity that further specified definitions for "at the checkpoint" and "circumvention." In June 2013, Border Patrol reported that it was developing a redesigned checkpoint information system that should address the data errors and issues identified by our report. The agency also noted that it was exploring ways to implement a data oversight procedure and training on the importance of accurate data collection. In October 2014, the Border Patrol reported that the recommendation was being addressed in various phases, with a new expected completion date of March 2015. In June 2015, Border Patrol revised the expected completion date to September 2015. In September 2016, Border Patrol officials stated that the agency had not yet updated its checkpoint data system or created a data oversight protocol. In October 2017, DHS stated that it expected to issue an updated checkpoint policy, including updates on data entry guidance and oversight to address data integrity, by February 28, 2018. In June 2018, Border Patrol reported that on June 13, 2018, it had submitted a draft of the updated checkpoint policy to the office of the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection for approval. In September 2018, Border Patrol estimated that the policy would be finalized by January 31, 2019. On June 12, 2019, the Chief of the Border Patrol issued a memo on checkpoint data integrity, including the recording of circumvention apprehensions. Officials from the Checkpoint Program Management Office also gave presentations to sectors regarding checkpoint data integrity. These steps provide internal controls for data used to provide sectors with information for checkpoint operations, and thus we are closing the recommendation as implemented.
|
| United States Customs and Border Protection | To improve the reliability and accountability of checkpoint performance results to the Congress and the public, the Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection should implement the quality of life measures that have already been identified by the Border Patrol to evaluate the impact that checkpoints have on local communities. Implementing these measures would include identifying appropriate data sources available at the local, state, or federal level, and developing guidance for how data should be collected and used in support of these measures. |
In our review of Border Patrol traffic checkpoints, we found that the Border Patrol had identified some measures to evaluate the impact that checkpoints have on local communities in terms of quality of life, but Border Patrol had not implemented the measures. As a result, the Border Patrol lacked information on how checkpoint operations could affect nearby communities. In October 2009, the Border Patrol reported that it was reevaluating its checkpoint performance measures, including quality of life measures. In December 2012, the DHS Center of Excellence completed a study for CBP on checkpoints. This study made several recommendations to Border Patrol on evaluating the impact of checkpoints on local communities using quantitative measures and with maintaining regular contact with the public to elicit opinions on experiences with the checkpoint, both positive and negative. At the time, the Border Patrol noted it intended to develop quantitative measures on community impact, such as on public safety and quality of life, using information collected in the new checkpoint information system it was planning. Border Patrol also noted that it was considering the budgetary feasibility of (1) conducting a survey of checkpoint travelers to gather detailed information about the community and impact metrics that are of highest importance to the public and (2) implementing an expedited lane for regular and pre-approved travelers. In July 2014, the Border Patrol revised the expected completion date for this recommendation to March 2015, noting that it planned to request ideas from the field commanders on what the agency could measure that would accurately depict the impact of checkpoints on the community. In June 2015, Border Patrol revised the expected completion date to September 2015. In September 2016, officials from Border Patrol's Checkpoint Program Management Office said quality of life measures had not been implemented and they were not aware of any plans to develop and implement such measures. In October 2017, DHS stated that it expected to establish performance measures related to community impacts by February 28, 2018. In December 2017, Border Patrol disseminated guidance to begin utilizing the CBP Complaint Management System to track compliments, complaints, and allegations to improve transparency between the agency and the general public. In June 2018, Border Patrol reported to us that the Checkpoint Program Management Office was making progress on identifying and implementing such performance measures. As of September 2018, Border Patrol reported to us that it expected to fully implement these measures by February 2019. However, in May 2019, Border Patrol reported to us that it changed the approach to addressing this recommendation. Specifically, instead of implementing quality of life measures-which officials said would not be feasible-to assess the impact checkpoints have on their surrounding communities, it would instead implement protection of communities measures. According to Border Patrol officials, measuring quality of life is outside their mission. Officials noted that protection of communities measures are intended to assess the impacts Border Patrol operations have on illicit activity coming through and around checkpoints. We believe this information is already measured by existing operational checkpoint metrics, such as apprehension and seizure location data, and would not provide Border Patrol with information on the impacts checkpoints have on the quality of life of their surrounding communities. Accordingly, we believe the new approach and measures Border Patrol has proposed are not consistent with the intent of this recommendation, and we are closing this recommendation as not implemented.
|
| United States Customs and Border Protection | To improve the reliability and accountability of checkpoint performance results to the Congress and the public, the Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection should use the information generated from the quality of life measures in conjunction with other relevant factors to inform resource allocations and address identified impacts. |
In our review of Border Patrol traffic checkpoints, we found that while the Border Patrol's national strategy cites the importance of assessing the community impact of Border Patrol operations, the implementation of such measures was lacking in terms of checkpoint operations. We recommended that Border Patrol implement such measures in areas of community concern to provide greater attention and priority in Border Patrol operational and staffing decisions to address any existing issues. In October 2009, the Border Patrol reported that once it had completed an upgrade of its existing checkpoint data systems and had reevaluated its checkpoint performance measures, the agency would begin using information garnered by these performance measures to inform future resource allocation decisions. This was originally expected to be completed by September 30, 2010, but due to budgetary and other issues, the checkpoint system upgrades were not yet completed as of June 2013. Border Patrol reported to us in June 2013 that the redesigned and upgraded checkpoint information system was expected to be implemented in September 2014. In July 2014, however, Border Patrol revised its expected completion date to March 2016. In June 2015, Border Patrol reported that it was on target to meet this March 2016 completion date. However, in September 2016, officials from Border Patrol's Checkpoint Program Management Office stated that they were not aware of any planned or completed actions to address this recommendation. In October 2017, DHS stated that it expected to establish performance measures related to community impacts by February 28, 2018, and that these measures would be used to inform resource allocation decisions. In June 2018, Border Patrol reported to us that the Checkpoint Program Management Office was making progress on identifying and implementing such performance measures. As of September 2018, Border Patrol reported to us that it expected to fully implement these measures by February 2019. However, in May 2019, Border Patrol reported to us that it changed the approach to addressing this recommendation. Specifically, instead of implementing quality of life measures, which officials said would not be feasible, to assess the impact checkpoints have on their surrounding communities and using that information generated to inform resource allocations and address identified impacts, it would instead implement protection of communities measures. According to Border Patrol officials, measuring quality of life is outside their mission. Officials noted that protection of communities measures are intended to assess the impacts Border Patrol operations have on illicit activity coming through and around checkpoints. We believe this information is already measured by existing operational checkpoint metrics, such as apprehension and seizure location data, and would not provide Border Patrol with information on the impacts checkpoints have on the quality of life of their surrounding communities. Accordingly, we believe the new approach and measures Border Patrol has proposed are not consistent with the intent of this recommendation, and we are closing this recommendation as not implemented.
|
| United States Customs and Border Protection | To ensure that the checkpoint design process results in checkpoints that are sized and resourced to meet operational and community needs, the Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection should require that current and expected traffic volumes be considered by the Border Patrol when determining the number of inspection lanes at new permanent checkpoints, that traffic studies be conducted and documented, and that these requirements be explicitly documented in Border Patrol checkpoint design guidelines and standards. |
In our review of Border Patrol traffic checkpoints, we found that the Border Patrol did not conduct traffic studies when designing three recently constructed checkpoints. As a result, we could not determine if the Border Patrol complied with its checkpoint design guidelines to consider current and future traffic volumes when determining the number of inspection lanes at three recently constructed checkpoints. In the absence of documented traffic studies, the Border Patrol could not determine if the number of inspection lanes at each of these checkpoints was consistent with current and projected traffic volumes, or if a different number of lanes would have been more appropriate. We recommended that the Border Patrol require that traffic studies be conducted and documented for all new permanent checkpoints, and that traffic volumes be considered by the Border Patrol when determining the number of inspection lanes at these new checkpoints. On October 28, 2009, the Border Patrol finalized an addendum to the Border Patrol Facilities Design Standard, which requires the Border Patrol to acquire, document, and utilize traffic study data collected by the State Departments of Transportation regarding current and projected traffic volumes on roadways where permanent checkpoints are to be constructed. The traffic studies will be documented by the Border Patrol and utilized as the baseline requirement to determine the number of inspection lanes at new permanent checkpoints.
|
| United States Customs and Border Protection | To ensure that the checkpoint design process results in checkpoints that are sized and resourced to meet operational and community needs, the Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection should, in connection with planning for new or upgraded checkpoints, conduct a workforce planning needs assessment for checkpoint staffing allocations to determine the resources needed to address anticipated levels of illegal activity around the checkpoint. |
In our review of Border Patrol traffic checkpoints, we found that Border Patrol's checkpoint strategy to push illegal aliens and smugglers to areas around checkpoints-which could include nearby communities-underscores the need for the Border Patrol to ensure that it deploys sufficient resources and staff to these areas. We recommended that Border Patrol conduct a needs assessment when planning for a new or upgraded checkpoint in order to better ensure that officials consider the potential impact of the checkpoint on the community and plan for a sufficient number of agents and resources. In October 2009, Border Patrol reported that the agency was evaluating its checkpoint policy regarding the establishment of a new checkpoint or the upgrade of an old checkpoint, and checkpoint policy changes would be finalized by September 30, 2010. Border Patrol also reported that checkpoint system upgrades that capture data on checkpoint performance would help management determine future resource needs at checkpoints. In June 2013, Border Patrol reported that due to budget and other issues, the checkpoint system upgrade had not been completed, and the rewritten checkpoint data protocol had not been approved. In June 2013, Border Patrol reported that as part of the checkpoint study conducted by the DHS Centers of Excellence, the Centers created checkpoint simulation tools that would help inform resource allocations when determining the number of inspection lanes on current or new checkpoints. The Border Patrol agreed with the utility of such a model, but noted that the Border Patrol would need to purchase modeling software--a cost-prohibitive measure in the current budget environment. In the interim, Border Patrol is developing a formal workforce staffing model to identify staffing strategies for all Border Patrol duties. Border Patrol expected to implement this model for checkpoint staffing assignments in fiscal year 2014. However, in July 2014, Border Patrol reported that the Border Patrol Personnel Requirements Determination project was still being developed and would not be complete until 2015. That process would inform staffing at checkpoints. As a result, Border Patrol revised its expected implementation date to September 2015. In June 2015, Border Patrol reported that it was on target to implement this recommendation by September 2015. However, according to the Border Patrol official overseeing the project, subsequent changes in leadership and factors unrelated to checkpoints have affected the overall time frames for the Personnel Requirements Determination project. In September 2016, Border Patrol officials reported that the agency's Personnel Requirements Determination process would not provide information on staffing needs until fiscal year 2017 or 2018, and also noted that this effort was not specifically examining staffing needs at checkpoints. In October 2017, DHS stated that it expected to use information from the Personnel Requirements Determination process to determine staffing requirements and address our recommendation by September 30, 2019. In June 2019, Border Patrol reported that first version of tools from the Personnel Requirements Determination project will be available in September 2019, but officials reported that the staffing model from that project will not address staffing below the station level. Therefore, the project will not result in a workforce planning needs assessment that can be applied specifically to checkpoint operations. Accordingly, we are closing the recommendation as not implemented.
|
Full Report
GAO Contacts
Topics
Immigration statusBorder patrolsBorder securityData collectionDrug traffickingHomeland securityImmigration enforcementInspectionInternal controlsPerformance measuresProperty damagesStandardsStrategic planningTerroristsRisk managementRisk assessmentReporting requirementsMonitoringNeeds assessment