Audit Finds INS Mismanaged $31 Million Automation Project System Aimed at Improving Monitoring of Foreign Visitors

By Cheryl W. Thompson Washington Post Staff Writer Monday, November 12, 2001; Page A08

Immigration and Naturalization Service officials mismanaged a $31 million project aimed at automating a system that monitors the entry and exit of foreign visitors and determines the number of overstays, according to a government audit.

The review by the Justice Department's inspector general also found that during the past five years, INS officials have delayed completion dates of automation projects without explanation and increased the costs of projects "with no justification for how the funds are spent.

"The INS has a substantial history of difficulties in managing its automation initiatives . . . despite the substantial investment it had made in such programs," the report said.

The most recent audit examined the "design and implementation" of an automated I-94 system. The I-94 is a form used to gather arrival and departure data of most foreign visitors to make sure they don't remain in the United States after the expiration of their authorized stays.

An estimated 40 percent of the 5 million illegal immigrants living in the United States last year were listed as overstays, the report said. It is unclear how many were actual overstays and how many were mistakenly counted as such because of poor record-keeping by INS. Canadians and foreign nationals are not required to complete the form.

INS began developing the system to automate the processing of air passenger I-94 forms six years ago, the report said. The system is used at airports in Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Charlotte and St. Louis, and only two airlines -- TWA and US Airways -- are participating. Northwest Airlines agreed to test the automated system but declined to permanently participate after expressing concerns, including questioning the purpose of the I-94 process, according to the report.

Federal immigration laws passed in 1996 and 2000 required the INS to create an automated entry and exit system to be used at all land, air and sea ports of entry. The system was not being used at any land or sea ports, according to the report.

The report found that the INS "does not have clear evidence that the system meets its intended goals."

"We found that the INS has not properly managed the project," the report said. "INS management does not have information necessary to determine whether the project is progressing as expected."

INS officials, in a written response to the inspector general, said they agree that changes are necessary to the automated system and that they are developing a way to run it more cost-effectively.

Under the INS's primary system, workers manually collect I-94 forms when foreign visitors board flights to the United States. Inspectors keep the passenger's "arrival record" portion of the form and give the passenger the "departure record" portion. INS then sends the arrival record to a contractor who inputs the information into a system. When the passenger leaves the United States, the airline collects the departure record and passes it on to INS, which is supposed to input the information into a system. Officials could then match data to determine overstays, the report said.

But there are flaws in the manual system, the report said. Arrival information was not routinely entered into the system; departure records were not always gathered; and 25 percent of the arrival and departure records did not match. The result: Scores of foreign visitors were classified as overstays even though they had left the country. The monitoring of overstays has been a "management challenge," the report said.

INS officials said $57 million more is needed through fiscal 2005 to complete the automated system, according to the audit. However, the report cautioned the INS about spending more money until the agency conducts a cost-benefit analysis and implements performance measures.

-- Anonymous, November 12, 2001

Answers

I'm an ex Fed, but this is the same OLD story of horrendous screwups of huge computer projects by the U.S. government. I don't know if anyone remembers the IRS follies. And my old Agency A.I.D. has some dillies. And I could go on and on.

One problem, certainly not the only one, is that companies that screw up usually have a member or members of Congress who will make excuses for them and fight to the death for them.

Or the White House. The worst mess I was ever associated with, although in a very peripheral way, involved a businessman who was viewed very fondly by the Richard Nixon White House.

-- Anonymous, November 12, 2001

Surely you jest... a screwup? ;)

-- Anonymous, November 13, 2001