Compacts of Free Association: Populations in U.S. Areas Have Grown, with Varying Reported Effects

The U.S. compacts of free association permit eligible citizens from the freely associated states (FAS), including Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, and Palau, to migrate to the United States and its territories without visa and labor certification requirements. In fiscal year 2004, Congress authorized and appropriated $30 million annually for 20 years to help defray costs associated with compact migration in affected jurisdictions, particularly Hawaii, Guam, and the CNMI. This funding ends in 2023, though migration to U.S. areas is permitted to continue and is expected to grow.

GAO was asked to review topics related to compact migration. This report describes (1) estimated compact migrant populations and recent trends in compact migration; (2) reported costs related to compact migration in Hawaii, Guam, and the CNMI; and (3) effects of compact migration on governments, workforces, and societies in these and other U.S. areas. GAO reviewed Census Bureau data to determine the numbers of compact migrants in U.S. areas. In addition, GAO interviewed federal, state, and territory government officials; representatives of private sector and nonprofit groups employing or serving compact migrants; FAS embassy and consular officials; and members of compact migrant communities.

In commenting on a draft of this report, U.S. area governments and FAS Ambassadors to the United States identified areas for additional study related to compact migration and impact. Some also discussed policy considerations, including restoration of Medicaid benefits to compact migrants.

More than 94,000 compact migrants—that is, citizens of the Federated States of Micronesia (Micronesia), the Republic of the Marshall Islands (Marshall Islands), and the Republic of Palau (Palau) as well as their U.S.-born children and grandchildren younger than 18 years—live and work in the United States and its territories, according to Census Bureau data. Data from Census Bureau surveys covering the periods 2005-2009 and 2013-2017 and an enumeration in 2018 show that the combined compact migrant populations in U.S. areas grew by an estimated 68 percent, from about 56,000 to about 94,000. Historically, many compact migrants have lived in Hawaii, Guam, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI). From 2013 to 2018, an estimated 50 percent of compact migrants lived on the U.S. mainland.

Hawaii, Guam, and the CNMI track and report the financial costs related to compact migration, or compact impact, for their state or territory. These areas reported estimated costs totaling $3.2 billion during the period fiscal years 2004 through 2018. In fiscal years 2004 through 2019, Hawaii, Guam, and the CNMI received a combined total of approximately $509 million in federal grants to help defray the costs of providing services to compact migrants.

In the U.S. areas GAO visited—Arkansas, the CNMI, Guam, Hawaii, Oregon, and Washington—state and territorial officials identified effects of providing public education and health care services to compact migrants. Some area governments use a combination of federal and state or territorial funds to extend health care coverage to compact migrants. For example, some states help compact migrants pay for coverage through health insurance exchanges, created under the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, by covering the cost of premiums not covered by advanced premium tax credits available to eligible compact migrants. Effects of compact migration in these U.S. areas also include compact migrants' budgetary contributions through payment of taxes and fees as well as their workforce contributions—for example, through jobs in hotels, manufacturing, the U.S. military, poultry processing, caregiving, and government.

In May 2019, the Presidents of the United States, the Federated States of  Micronesia (Micronesia), the Republic of the Marshall Islands (Marshall  Islands), and the Republic of Palau (Palau) reaffirmed their countries’  commitments to the compacts of free association between the United  States and each of the three other nations. These agreements provide,  among other things, for U.S. economic assistance to these three freely  associated states (FAS), exclusive U.S. military use rights and defense  responsibilities in the FASs, and the ability of eligible FAS citizens to  enter the United States without a visa and reside indefinitely in U.S.  areas—the 50 U.S. states, the District of Columbia, and the U.S.  territories. Since the compacts went into effect—in 1986 for Micronesia  and the Marshall Islands and in 1994 for Palau—tens of thousands of  migrants from these countries have established residence in U.S. areas.

While many compact provisions are ongoing, certain economic  assistance to Micronesia and the Marshall Islands ends in fiscal year  2023 and assistance to Palau ends in fiscal year 2024. In addition,  certain annual federal grants to designated U.S. areas to defray costs  resulting from migration under the compacts (compact migration) from the  three FASs to these areas are set to end in fiscal year 2023. Legislation  defines these designated areas—Hawaii, Guam, the Commonwealth of  the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI), and American Samoa—as affected  jurisdictions. Migration from the FASs to U.S. areas can be expected to  continue beyond the expiration of these grants to the affected  jurisdictions. In September 2019, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State  for Australia, New Zealand, and the Pacific Islands testified that the  Department of State is coordinating an interagency group to evaluate a  range of options to promote the United States’ continued relationship with  Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, and Palau.

You asked us to review topics related to compact migration in advance of  upcoming discussions regarding the expiration of certain assistance  under the compacts in 2023. This report (1) presents estimates of  compact migrant populations and describes recent trends in compact  migration; (2) summarizes the reported costs related to compact  migration (compact impact costs) in three affected jurisdictions—Hawaii,  Guam, and the CNMI; and (3) describes effects of compact migration on  governments, workforces, and societies in these and other U.S. areas.

As part of this review, we obtained special tabulations of data from the  Census Bureau’s 2013-2017 American Community Survey for the 50 U.S.  states, District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. For the U.S. territories  included in this review that are not covered by the survey (Guam and the  CNMI), we used the revised 2018 Census Bureau enumeration of  compact migrants in these areas. We also obtained compact impact cost  information that the affected jurisdictions reported annually to the  Department of the Interior (Interior) and information about grants that they  received to defray these costs.

Additionally, we traveled to, and interviewed stakeholders in, six U.S.  states and territories with compact migrant populations, including three  affected jurisdictions (Hawaii, Guam, and the CNMI) and three mainland  states (Arkansas, Oregon, and Washington). We selected these areas on  the basis of previously reported compact migrant populations and the  locations of consulates or Honorary Consuls for Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, and Palau. Stakeholders whom we interviewed for this review  included federal officials from agencies such as Interior, the Department  of State, and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS); state and  territorial government officials in areas we visited; representatives of  private sector and nonprofit organizations such as chambers of  commerce, employers of compact migrants, and nonprofit service  providers; FAS embassy and consulate officials or Honorary Consuls; and  compact migrants living in the areas we visited.

We also obtained data from DHS Customs and Border Protection’s Arrival  and Departure Information System to determine net migration to U.S.  areas. To assess the reliability of the data, we spoke with DHS officials to  identify potential data reliability concerns and other limitations, and we  validated the data by checking it against publicly available passenger  data from the Department of Transportation. We found that the data were  sufficiently reliable to describe net compact migration from 2017 through  2019.

For more details of our objectives, scope, and methodology, see  appendix I.

We conducted this performance audit from March 2019 through June  2020 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing  standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to  obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for  our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe  that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings  and conclusions based on our audit objectives.

Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, and Palau are among the smallest  countries in the world. In fiscal year 2017, the three FASs had a  combined resident population of approximately 175,000 (102,622 in  Micronesia; 54,354 in the Marshall Islands; and 17,901 in Palau).  Interior’s Office of Insular Affairs (OIA) has primary responsibility for  monitoring and coordinating U.S. assistance to the FASs, and State is  responsible for government-to-government relations.

The U.S. relationship with the FASs began when American forces  liberated the islands from Japanese control near the end of World War II.  In 1947, the United States entered into a trusteeship with the United  Nations and became the administering authority over Micronesia, the  Marshall Islands, and Palau. Voters approved the Constitution of the  Federated States of Micronesia in 1978 and approved the Constitution of  the Marshall Islands in 1979. Both Micronesia and the Marshall Islands  remained subject to the authority of the United States until 1986, when a  compact of free association went into effect between the United States  and the two nations. The Palau constitution took effect in 1981, and  Palau entered into a compact of free association with the United States in  1994. Micronesia and Marshall Islands became members of the United  Nations in 1991, while Palau joined the organization in 1994.

Under its compacts with Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, and Palau, the  United States provided economic assistance that includes access to  certain federal services and programs, among other things, for defined  time periods.

Economic assistance to Micronesia and the Marshall Islands. The  1986 compact of free association between the United States and  Micronesia and the Marshall Islands, respectively, provided about  $2.6 billion in funding for fiscal years 1987 through 2003. In 2003,  the United States approved amended compacts of free association  with the two countries. According to Interior, economic assistance  under the amended compacts is projected to total $3.6 billion,  including payments for compact sector grants and trust fund  contributions for both countries in fiscal years 2004 through 2023.  Funding under the original compact and amended compacts has been  provided to Micronesia and the Marshall Islands through Interior.

Economic assistance to Palau. The compact of free association  between the United States and Palau entered into force in 1994 and  provided $574 million in funding through Interior for fiscal years 1995  through 2009 for assistance to the government, contributions to a trust  fund, construction of a road, and federal services. In September  2010, the United States and Palau signed an agreement that would,  among other things, provide for additional assistance to Palau,  including contributions to its trust fund. The 2010 agreement and  subsequent amendments entered into force in September 2018.  According to Interior, direct assistance to Palau under the compact  will total $229 million for fiscal years 2010 through 2024, including  $105 million that Congress provided in annual appropriations in fiscal  years 2010 through 2017.

Under the compacts, the United States has responsibility for defense and  security matters in, and relating to, each of the FASs, and subsidiary  agreements pursuant to the compacts provide for U.S. military use and  operating rights in these countries. According to the Department of  Defense, the compacts have enabled it to maintain a critical strategic  position in the Indo–Pacific region. The compact with the Marshall  Islands also provided for a separate agreement that constituted a full and  final settlement of all claims resulting from U.S. nuclear tests conducted in  the Marshall Islands during the period 1946 through 1958. In addition, a  subsidiary agreement with the Marshall Islands secured the United  States’ access to the U.S. military facilities on Kwajalein Atoll, which are  used for missile testing and space tracking activities.

Under the compacts, eligible FAS citizens are exempt from certain visa  and labor certification requirements of the Immigration and Nationality Act  as amended. The migration provisions of the compacts allow eligible  FAS citizens to enter the United States (including all states, territories,  and possessions) and to lawfully work and reside in the United States  indefinitely.

The implementing legislation for the 1986 compact with Micronesia and  the Marshall Islands stated that it was not Congress’s intent to cause any  adverse consequences for U.S. territories and commonwealths and the  state of Hawaii. The legislation further declared that Congress would act  sympathetically and expeditiously to redress any adverse consequences.  In addition, the legislation authorized compensation to be appropriated for  these areas that might experience increased demands on their  educational and social services from compact migrants from Micronesia,  the Marshall Islands, and Palau.

The legislation required the President to report and make  recommendations annually to Congress regarding adverse consequences  resulting from the compact and provide statistics on compact migration. In  November 2000, Congress made the submission of annual reports about  the impact of compact migration in affected jurisdictions—that is, compact  impact reports—optional and shifted the responsibility for preparing these  reports from the President to the governors of Hawaii and the territories.

Legislative Actions to Address Compact Impact

In December 2003, Congress took steps in the amended compacts’  implementing legislation to address compact impact in designated U.S.  areas. The legislation restated Congress’s intent not to cause any  adverse consequences for the areas defined as affected jurisdictions— Hawaii, Guam, the CNMI, and American Samoa. In addition, the  legislation authorized and appropriated funding for compact impact grants  to the affected jurisdictions, to be allocated on the basis of the proportion  of compact migrants living in each jurisdiction. Further, the legislation  required an enumeration of compact migrants to be undertaken at least  every 5 years. The legislation also permitted affected jurisdictions to  submit compact impact reports to the Secretary of the Interior.

Compact Impact Grants to Affected Jurisdictions

The implementing legislation for the amended compacts authorized and  appropriated $30 million for each fiscal year from 2004 through 2023 for  grants to the affected jurisdictions. According to the legislation, the grants  are provided to aid in defraying costs incurred by these jurisdictions as a  result of increased demand for services due to the residence of compact  migrants. OIA reviews the affected jurisdictions’ annual proposals for  the use of the funds and provides the funds to the jurisdictions as  compact impact grants. The grants are to be used only for health,  educational, social, or public safety services or for infrastructure related to  such services.

Figure 1 shows the locations of the FASs and the affected jurisdictions.

Required Enumerations of Compact Migrants

The implementing legislation for the amended compacts requires Interior  to conduct an enumeration of compact migrants, which is to be  supervised by the Census Bureau or another organization selected by  Interior, at least every 5 years beginning in fiscal year 2003. On the basis  of these enumerations, each affected jurisdiction is to receive a portion of  the annual $30 million appropriation in proportion to the number of  compact migrants living there. The legislation permits Interior to use up to  $300,000, adjusted for inflation, of the annual appropriation for compact  impact to conduct each enumeration.

The amended compacts’ implementing legislation defines a compact  migrant, for the purposes of the enumeration, as “a person, or their  children under the age of 18, admitted or resident pursuant to [the  compacts] who as of a date referenced in the most recently published  enumeration is a resident of an affected jurisdiction.”

Compact Migrant Eligibility for Selected Federal Programs

Compact migrants have varying eligibility for certain U.S. federal  government programs. Eligibility for some federal programs changed as a  result of the 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity  Reconciliation Act. For example, when the compacts were signed, FAS  citizens were eligible for Medicaid; however, the act removed this  eligibility. Table 1 shows compact migrants’ eligibility status for selected  federal benefit programs as of November 2019.

Compact Migrant Population Has Grown, with About Half Residing on U.S. Mainland

Total Compact Migrant Population in U.S. Areas Grew by 68 Percent over 9 Years

From 2009 to 2018, the number of compact migrants living in U.S. states  and territories rose by an estimated 68 percent, from about 56,000 to  about 94,000.

In 2011, we reported that combined data from the Census Bureau’s  2005-2009 American Community Survey and 2008 enumeration  showed an estimated 56,345 compact migrants living in U.S.  areas.

During the period 2013 to 2018, an estimated 94,399 compact  migrants lived in U.S. areas, according to combined data from the  Census Bureau’s 2013-2017 American Community Survey and 2018  required enumeration in Guam, the CNMI, and American Samoa.  This estimate includes Micronesian and Marshallese citizens who  entered the United States after 1986, Palauan citizens who entered  the United States after 1994, and certain U.S.-born children younger  than 18 years.

About Half of All Compact Migrants Resided on U.S. Mainland in 2013-2018

Data from the 2013-2017 American Community Survey and the 2018  enumeration indicate that an estimated 50 percent of compact migrants  lived on the U.S. mainland and an estimated 49 percent lived in the  affected jurisdictions during this period: 26 percent in Hawaii, 20 percent  in Guam, and 3 percent in the CNMI. This estimate indicates growth in  the number of compact migrants on the U.S. mainland since 2011, when  we reported that the Census Bureau estimated 58 percent of compact  migrants lived in the affected jurisdictions.

The Census Bureau estimated that 11 states in the U.S. mainland, in  addition to three of the four affected jurisdictions—Hawaii, Guam, and the  CNMI—had compact migrant populations of more than 1,000, according  to the 2013-2017 American Community Survey and the 2018  enumeration (see fig. 2).

Stakeholders Expressed Concerns about Undercounting of Compact Migrants

Stakeholders we interviewed—including FAS embassy and consular  officials, FAS community members, state government officials, and  representatives of private sector and nonprofit organizations—expressed  concerns about the Census Bureau’s prior estimates of compact  migrants. Some Arkansas stakeholders cited other, higher estimates of  the FAS population in their state. Moreover, some stakeholders said that  compact migrant populations are apprehensive or distrustful about being  formally counted through surveys or the census. Stakeholders also noted  that some compact migrant communities have felt frustrated at having  been encouraged to respond to surveys and be counted but not  experiencing any benefit from these efforts, according to a nonprofit  official and FAS community members. Marshallese consular officials  said that they believed the 2010 census undercounted their citizens,  noting that the Census Bureau did not employ any Marshallese surveyors  in the Arkansas counties with Marshallese populations.

Stakeholders also expressed concern about the decennial census to be  conducted in 2020, which, like the 2010 decennial census, will collect  information on race. Nonprofit organization officials whom we  interviewed expressed concern that the 2020 census could result in an  undercounting of compact migrants because of language barriers and  compact migrants’ difficulty accessing the census form online. Arkansas  health care and private sector representatives and the Marshallese  consulate described plans to address barriers to obtaining a more  accurate count of the population in the 2020 census. Hawaii is making a  statewide effort to ensure that compact migrants are counted in the 2020  census, according to Hawaii state officials. According to Guam officials,  an outreach effort in Guam has leveraged “trusted voices,” or parties  known to compact migrant communities there, to communicate the  importance of responding to the 2020 census.

Census Data Provide Additional Information about Compact Migrants in the States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico

Data from the American Community Survey showed an estimated 72,965  compact migrants living in the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and  Puerto Rico in 2013 through 2017.

An estimated 31,425 compact migrants living in these areas (43  percent) were U.S. citizens. The remaining estimated 41,540 (57  percent) were not U.S. citizens. The U.S. citizens who were counted  included naturalized citizens and minor-age U.S. citizen children of  compact migrants, who would no longer be counted as compact  migrants after reaching 18 years of age.

An estimated 25,555 compact migrants living in these areas were  born in Micronesia; 20,545 were born in the Marshall Islands; and  3,435 were born in Palau. These totals do not include compact  migrants born in the FAS and living in Guam, the CNMI, or American  Samoa, because the American Community Survey does not cover  these territories.

An estimated 27,735 compact migrants living in these areas who were  18 years and older (69 percent) were in the civilian labor force. Of  those, 24,540 (89 percent) were employed and 3,195 (12 percent)  were unemployed.

An estimated 1,660 compact migrants living in these areas—4 percent  of compact migrants 17 years and older—were on active duty in the  U.S. military or had served on active duty in the past.

For additional American Community Survey data on compact migrant  demographics, see appendix IV.

Reasons for Migration to U.S. Areas Vary

Compact migrants move to U.S. areas for a range of reasons, including  greater economic and educational opportunities, better access to health  care, a desire to join family members in the United States, and a wish for  greater personal freedom. In some communities we visited, stakeholders  noted that FAS citizens had come to the United States for school or work  before the compact with Micronesia and the Marshall Islands and the  compact with Palau went into effect but that the compacts had opened  the option of migration to a broader range of individuals.

Economic opportunities. Compact migrants described moving to  U.S. areas for better, more reliable jobs and higher wages. Having a  better-paying job in the United States sometimes allows individuals to  send remittances or consumer goods to family members living in an  FAS. Other compact migrants move to U.S. areas to join the military.

Educational opportunities. Compact migrant families often move to  U.S. areas so that their children will have access to improved primary  and secondary education, according to compact migrants. Some  compact migrants travel to U.S. areas to attend college and choose to  stay to work, including to pay off their student loans, according to  consular officials and compact migrants.

Health care access. Compact migrants sometimes migrate to U.S.  areas to obtain medical treatment for themselves or family members,  according to FAS community members and consular officials. Some  medical procedures or treatments, such as dialysis or access to  specialists, are not available in the FASs, according to federal and  nonprofit officials.

Family. Many compact migrants relocate to the United States to join  family members and communities already living there, according to  consular and nonprofit officials.

Personal freedom. Some compact migrants said that they have more  personal, social, and cultural freedom in the United States than in  their more traditional home country.

Changes in the natural environment in the FASs have also prompted  migration from those areas, according to FAS representatives. Depleted  food resources and effects of climate change—including more-frequent  typhoons, coral reef bleaching, and depletion of fishing stocks—have  contributed to migration, according to an FAS official. In addition,  members of Marshallese communities cited rising sea levels and frequent  tidal flooding as reasons for migrating from the Marshall Islands to U.S.  areas. Some Marshallese community members also noted that the legacy  of U.S. nuclear testing had contributed to their decision or need to  move.

Compact migrants cited varied reasons for choosing to migrate to specific  locations. For example, representatives of FAS communities in Guam and  the CNMI noted the FASs’ closer proximity to those territories than to the  U.S. mainland as well as the similarity of Guam’s and the CNMI’s island  cultures to those of their home countries. Also, some compact migrants in  Arkansas and Oregon cited the lower cost of living and a perception of  less discrimination or greater safety there than in Hawaii. Marshallese  community members often migrate to Arkansas for jobs in the poultry  industry.

Consular officials noted that, because of comparatively lower wages and  fewer housing options in the FASs, returning to their countries after living  in U.S. areas can be difficult for some compact migrants. Some compact  migrants said that it is also difficult to find a good job in their home  countries without family or political connections. According to an FAS  official, some compact migrants retire to their home countries. However,  several compact migrants we spoke with said they planned to stay in U.S.  areas to be close to medical care or to children and grandchildren born  there.

Hawaii, Guam, and the CNMI Have Reported Compact Impact Costs and Received Annual Grants to Defray Them

The affected jurisdictions of Hawaii, Guam, and the CNMI reported  estimated compact impact costs (i.e., costs incurred as a result of  increased demands on public services from compact migrants) that  totaled $3.2 billion during the period fiscal years 2004 through 2018 and  increased over time for Hawaii and Guam. Interior has provided compact  impact grants totaling more than $30 million annually to the affected  jurisdictions, each of which uses the funds differently. In October 2019,  Census discovered an error in the 2013 and 2018 enumerations, which  Interior had used to determine the distribution of compact impact grant  funds and which resulted in misallocation of these funds for fiscal years  2015 through 2020. In February 2020, Interior officials told us that the  department had developed a modified plan for compact impact grants in  fiscal years 2021 through 2023 that, according to the officials, is intended  to correct the misallocation.

Hawaii’s and Guam’s Reported Compact Impact Costs Have Risen, while the CNMI’s Have Varied

Hawaii, Guam, and the CNMI reported a total of $3.2 billion in estimated  compact impact costs during the period fiscal years 2004 through 2018,  with estimated annual costs increasing over time for Hawaii and Guam  and fluctuating for the CNMI.

Hawaii reported $1.8 billion in total estimated compact impact costs.

Hawaii’s reported annual costs increased from $55 million in fiscal  year 2004 to $198 million in fiscal year 2018.

Guam reported $1.2 billion in total estimated compact impact costs.

Guam’s reported annual costs increased from $33 million in fiscal  year 2004 to $147 million in fiscal year 2017.

The CNMI reported $116 million in total estimated compact impact  costs. The CNMI’s reported annual costs amounted to $10 million in  both fiscal year 2004 and fiscal year 2018 but fluctuated over time,  ranging from a low of about $3 million in fiscal year 2011 to a high of  $12 million in fiscal year 2014.

For a summary of the estimated compact impact costs reported by the  three affected jurisdictions, see figure 3. For more details of their  compact impact reporting, see appendix V.

The three affected jurisdictions reported compact impact costs for  education, health, public safety, and social services (see table 2). As the  table shows, the highest total costs in fiscal year 2017 were for education  and health services.

In November 2011, we found that Interior’s reporting to Congress on  compact impact had been limited, and we identified weaknesses in  existing compact impact reporting. We found that some jurisdictions did  not accurately define compact migrants, account for federal funding that  supplemented local expenditures, or include revenue received from  compact migrants. Our November 2011 report recommended that the  Secretary of the Interior disseminate guidelines to the affected  jurisdictions that adequately addressed concepts essential to producing  reliable impact estimates and that the Secretary call for the use of these  guidelines in developing compact impact reports. Although Interior  developed a draft of compact impact reporting guidelines in 2014, it had  not disseminated such guidelines to the affected jurisdictions as of  February 2020.

In 2019, Interior awarded the Guam government a technical assistance  grant for $280,000 to conduct a cost-benefit analysis to determine  compact migrants’ economic contribution to the local economy. The effort  will reportedly also seek to address weaknesses and methodological  concerns related to compact impact costs calculated by Hawaii, Guam,  and the CNMI. Guam officials said that the grant application was  prepared in response to our prior critique of their compact impact  estimation methodology. The grant was awarded to the Guam Bureau of  Statistics and Plans, which contracted with University of Guam  consultants to carry out the work beginning in October 2019. Guam  officials expected this work to result in two reports—one identifying  economic contributions by compact migrants (expected September 2021)  and another proposing a methodology for determining compact impact  costs (expected August 2022).

Hawaii, Guam, and the CNMI Have Received Grants to Defray Compact Impact Costs

During fiscal years 2004 through 2019, Hawaii, Guam, and the CNMI  received a combined total of approximately $509 million in compact  impact grant funding. This total includes (1) annual compact impact grant  funding allocated from $30 million authorized and appropriated in the  amended compacts’ implementing legislation and (2) additional compact  impact grant funding allocated from annual appropriations.

In fiscal years 2004 through 2019, Interior made annual allocations of  the $30 million of compact impact grant funds authorized and  appropriated in the amended compacts’ implementing legislation.  Interior provided these allocations as compact impact grants to each  affected jurisdiction to defray their costs due to the residence of  compact migrants. Interior used the four most recent enumerations— conducted in 2003, 2008, 2013, and 2018—as the basis for these  annual allocations.

Since fiscal year 2012, Interior has provided additional compact  impact grant funding to the affected jurisdictions from annual  appropriations. This additional funding has ranged from approximately  $3 million to $5 million per year since fiscal year 2012. Interior has  allocated the additional funding on the basis of the 2013 and 2018  enumerations.

Table 3 shows the total amounts that Hawaii, Guam, and the CNMI  received as compact impact grant funding in fiscal years 2004 through  2019.

Affected jurisdictions use their compact impact grant funding in varying  ways and report on their use of the funds to Interior. Hawaii allocates the  entirety of its compact impact grant—approximately $13 million annually  since fiscal year 2015—to the state’s MedQuest division to defray costs of  providing medical services to compact migrants. Guam has used some of  its approximately $15 million of compact impact funding each year for  new schools constructed through leasebacks (see fig. 4 for photos of  several schools built by the Guam government with compact impact  funds). The CNMI allocates its approximately $2 million of compact  impact funding each year across the education, health care, public safety,  and social service sectors. Hawaii, Guam, and CNMI officials have  emphasized that compact impact funding does not fully compensate for  the expenses associated with compact migration. For stakeholder  suggestions related to compact impact funding and other issues, see  appendix VII.

Misallocation of Compact Impact Grant Funding in Fiscal Years 2015-2020

In October 2019, Census Bureau officials discovered an error in the 2013  and 2018 Census Bureau enumerations that caused inaccurate counts of  compact migrants in Hawaii and, according to Interior officials, resulted in  misallocation of compact impact funding for Hawaii, Guam, the CNMI,  and American Samoa in fiscal years 2015 through 2020. Relative to the  proportion of compact migrants in each jurisdiction, allocations to Hawaii  were a total of $16.9 million lower than they would have been without the  enumeration error while allocations to Guam, the CNMI, and American  Samoa were higher than they would have been without the error. Table  4 summarizes the under- and overpayments of compact impact funding to  each affected jurisdiction that, according to Interior officials, resulted from  the enumeration error.

The enumeration error was discovered in late October 2019, near the  beginning of fiscal year 2020. As of February 2020, OIA officials had  developed a modified planned allocation of compact impact funds for  fiscal years 2021 to 2023. Beginning in fiscal year 2021, OIA plans to  divide the $30 million of annual compact impact grant funding in fiscal  years 2021 through 2023 using corrected base allocations from the  updated 2018 enumeration from Census Bureau, according to an Interior  preliminary assessment. The base allocations will be adjusted upward for  Hawaii and downward for Guam, the CNMI, and American Samoa to  correct for the erroneous payments in fiscal years 2015 through 2020.  See table 5 for a comparison of the originally planned fiscal year 2020  allocation (based on the erroneous enumeration) and the revised  allocation (based on the corrected enumeration) as well as the grant  amounts that OIA proposed for fiscal years 2021 through 2023 to correct  for the erroneous payments.

Compact Migration Affects Government Programs, Workforces, and Societies

The governments of some of the U.S. areas we visited identified effects of  providing public education and health care services to compact  migrants. Compact migration’s effects in U.S. areas we visited also  include budgetary contributions from compact migrants’ payment of taxes  and fees as well as budgetary costs of other government programs and  services to compact migrants. Stakeholders in the U.S. areas  additionally discussed the participation of compact migrants in those  areas’ workforces and communities in terms of contributions and impacts  of compact migration.

U.S. Area Governments Identify Effects of Providing Programs and Services to Compact Migrants

Children of compact migrants attending U.S. public primary and  secondary schools sometimes receive additional or specialized services,  such as support for English language learners, according to state and  territorial officials. In the U.S. areas we visited, state and territorial  departments and school districts have identified and counted compact  migrant students by means of one or more criteria, including ethnicity,  language, and place of birth. See table 6 for estimated numbers of  compact migrant students in the states and territories we visited and the  criteria that each state or territory used to count students as compact  migrants.

Compact migrants are eligible for in-state tuition at some U.S.-based  colleges and universities, according to university, nonprofit, and state  officials. For example, in Guam, compact migrants attending the  University of Guam are eligible for in-state tuition. In Oregon, FAS citizens  are eligible for in-state tuition after a 1-year residency period in the state,  according to nonprofit officials. In Arkansas, Marshallese citizens are  eligible for in-state tuition after a 3-year residency period in the state,  according to state tuition policy and officials.

States and territories have reported budget and program effects related to  health care for compact migrants who are eligible for federal benefits as  well as health care for individuals, including compact migrants, who are  ineligible for federal benefits and lack private insurance or other means of  payment. U.S. area governments sought to enable compact migrants’  access to health care in several ways, including extending access to the  federal Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) or Medicaid and  leveraging federal health insurance tax credits and other federal funding.  According to some U.S. area government officials, some of these  programs are provided specifically because compact migrants are  ineligible for certain programs at the federal level.

Extended Access to Children’s Health Insurance Program or  Medicaid  The Children’s Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2009  included an option for states to cover children younger than 21 years and  pregnant women in both CHIP and Medicaid who are lawfully residing in  the United States—a definition that includes compact migrants—and who  are otherwise eligible under the state plan. Therefore, in some U.S.  areas, non-U.S. citizen compact migrants who are children or pregnant  may access federal health insurance coverage through CHIP or Medicaid.  As of February 2020, 38 states and territories and the District of Columbia had extended such coverage to lawfully residing non–U.S. citizen  pregnant women or children, including compact migrants, who met all  other eligibility requirements (see fig. 5). According to Arkansas officials,  their state’s decision to extend this coverage was sought in part to  address unmet needs of compact migrants living in Arkansas.

Subsidized Coverage in Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act  Exchanges  Compact migrants are eligible to purchase individual market health  insurance plans through health insurance exchanges established under  the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). Individuals  purchasing coverage through the exchanges may be eligible, depending  on their incomes, to receive financial assistance in the form of premium  tax credits to offset the costs of their coverage. Premium tax credits,  which are designed to reduce an eligible individual’s premium costs, may  be either paid in advance on a monthly basis to an enrollee’s issuer  (referred to as advance premium tax credits) or received after the  individual files federal income taxes for the prior year.

Some state governments have elected to cover the remaining balance of  some individuals’ exchange plans, leveraging a combination of advance  premium tax credits and state funds to fully cover health insurance  premiums on certain exchange plans. For example, Hawaii created the  Health Care Premium Assistance Program, a special state program that  covers the cost of premiums on eligible plans for qualified residents who  do not qualify for Medicaid. While Hawaii’s program was not created  specifically in response to compact migration and is not limited to  compact migrants, most of its enrollees are compact migrants, according  to Hawaii government officials. Since its launch in 2015, the program  pays the balance of health insurance premiums not covered by advance  premium tax credits for those who would otherwise be qualified for federal  Medicaid if not for their citizenship status, including compact migrants.  According to state officials, the program covered 3,223 compact migrants  residing in Hawaii as of June 2017.

Oregon and Washington developed premium assistance programs  specific to compact migrants that leverage advance premium tax credits  to eliminate health care premium costs. In addition to covering  premiums, these programs provide for out-of-pocket health care costs,  according to the programs’ websites and state officials.

Oregon COFA Premium Assistance Program. The Oregon COFA  Premium Assistance Program was launched in 2017, expressly to  help compact migrants gain access to health care. In Oregon,  participants pay for out-of-pocket costs at the time of service and  subsequently apply to the program for reimbursement. Oregon’s  program covered 780 compact migrants as of October 2019,  according to state officials. The officials estimated that this program  leverages $9 of federal funds through advance premium tax credits for  every $1 of Oregon state funds contributed.

Washington COFA Islander Health Care. The Washington COFA  Islander Health Care program was launched in 2019, expressly to  help compact migrants gain access to health care, and was based in  part on the Oregon program, according to state officials. Washington  will also cover dental insurance costs for compact migrants beginning  in 2021, according to the program’s website and state officials.  Participants in Washington’s program receive a payment card with  preloaded funds to use for out-of-pocket costs. The program covered  approximately 1,100 compact migrants in 2019, according to state  officials. (Fig. 6 shows an example of an advertisement for  Washington’s program, presenting information in six languages  spoken by compact migrants.)

Additional Federal Health Care Funding in U.S. Territories  All U.S. territories, including Guam and the CNMI, receive federal funding  through Medicaid, which is subject to an annual cap. Section 2005 of the  PPACA, as amended, increased the funding caps for the territories for the  period beginning on July 1, 2011, and ending on September 30, 2019,  and provided a total of $6.3 billion in additional federal funding for health  care to the territories.

Guam and the CNMI have used some of this funding, in addition to other  federal funding for health care, to partially support compact migrants’  health care costs or to alleviate the burden on programs that cover  compact migrants.

Guam. PPACA Section 2005 funding partly alleviated the financial  shortfall of Guam’s Medically Indigent Program, according to a  territory official. The Medically Indigent Program pays for health care  costs of primarily non-U.S. citizens living in Guam, including compact  migrants, who do not have other health insurance. Most compact  migrants in Guam qualify for this program after meeting the 6-month  residency requirement, according to Guam officials. In fiscal year  2019, compact migrants participating in the program numbered 8,616,  according to Guam officials, and made up 73 percent of the program’s  total participation. The officials said that the program is also funded  through Guam local appropriations and federal Medicaid  Undocumented Emergency Services funding.

CNMI. Territorial hospital officials said that PPACA Section 2005  funding available in fiscal years 2011 through 2019 partially covered  patient care costs in excess of the territory’s annual Medicaid cap,  including care for compact migrants. The CNMI Medicaid program  uses federal Disaster Relief Assistance funding to reimburse the  hospital for emergency services provided to compact migrants,  according to CNMI officials.

Other Health Care Services Available to Compact Migrants  Non-U.S. citizens, including compact migrants, may access health care  through the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Health  Resources and Services Administration’s Health Center Program and  through state government–supported clinics. The Health Center Program  was established in the mid-1960s to help low-income individuals gain  access to health care services. Health centers are responsible for  delivering affordable, accessible, high-quality, comprehensive primary  health care regardless of recipients’ ability to pay, according to  Department of Health and Human Services officials. Figure 7 shows the  entrance to Kokua Kalihi Valley, a federally qualified health center in  Honolulu that estimates one-third of its patient population to be compact  migrants, mostly from Micronesia.

State clinics provide health services such as screening and treatment of  certain infectious diseases to compact migrants, among other state  residents. For example, the Arkansas Department of Health established  the Dr. Joseph Bates Outreach Clinic to provide public health services to  Marshallese in the region. As of September 2019, approximately 95  percent of the clinic’s patients were Marshallese, according to clinic  officials. In addition, the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences  Northwest Campus facilitates research and community health programs  in the Marshallese community and has established a clinic focused on  diabetes.

Compact Migration Has Other Budgetary Effects

The budgetary effects of compact migration in the U.S. areas we visited  include contributions by compact migrants, such as payment of federal  and state taxes and fees, and also include several types of government  program costs related to compact migration.

Budgetary contributions. Compact migrants pay payroll taxes,  including income taxes, and contributions to Social Security and  Medicare. They also pay fees associated with state or territorial  documentation or licensing, including driver’s licenses. In general,  reliable data on budgetary contributions of compact migrants are not  available, because state and territorial tax filings and related  databases do not provide data on citizenship or ethnicity, according to  state and territorial officials. However, the Hawaiian government  reported that in 2017, compact migrants generated an estimated  $36.6 million in state revenue from fees and taxes, such as the  individual income tax, general excise taxes, and taxes generated from  state government spending. According to University of Guam  officials and an FAS community member, the presence of FAS  communities may have helped Guam institutions obtain funding,  including funding for research.

Budgetary costs. State and territorial officials identified budgetary  costs related to compact migration. For example, officials cited costs  of providing translators or interpreters for government programs and  costs associated with compact migrant interactions with police and the justice system. Some states have elected to extend state-level  programs for food or cash-based assistance to compact migrants who  are ineligible for the federal equivalents. For example, Washington’s  Cash Assistance and Food Assistance Programs provide financial  support to FAS citizens who are ineligible for the federal  Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and Temporary  Assistance for Needy Families. In Guam, some compact migrants  qualify for the federal earned income tax credit, according to officials  of Guam’s Department of Revenue and Taxation. The officials noted  that because Guam’s tax system mirrors the federal system, any  earned income tax credit paid in Guam is an expense to the territorial  government.

Compact Migrants Contribute to Workforces and Face Reported Challenges

Compact migrants are eligible to work in U.S. areas and have contributed  to the workforces of receiving communities, holding jobs in a range of  industries. According to stakeholders we interviewed, compact migrants  have encountered challenges while participating in the workforce.

Workforce Contributions by Compact Migrants

In the U.S. areas where they reside, compact migrants participate in the  local economies in part by serving in the workforce in a variety of fields,  including manufacturing, service industries, and professional industries,  according to stakeholders we interviewed. See table 7 for examples.

The following describes compact migrants’ participation in the areas we  visited.

Arkansas. Arkansas private sector representatives described  Marshallese workers as essential to poultry plant operations,  comprising one-quarter to one-third of some plants’ workers. At one  such plant, most Marshallese employed are line workers on the floor  of the plant, while others work as trainers and translators. Other  compact migrants in Arkansas work at an airport; in hotels; in retail; or  as caregivers, including in adult day care, according to FAS consular  officials and nonprofit representatives.

CNMI. CNMI officials and a private sector representative described  compact migrants as a valuable resource in supplementing the  CNMI’s small labor pool. Officials also noted that without compact  migrants, businesses would have to recruit more foreign labor and  face more-severe hiring challenges than they do now. Officials and a  private sector representative stated that several businesses and  franchises were founded by, and employ, compact migrants.

Guam. Guam Chamber of Commerce representatives indicated that  compact migrant workers would not be easily replaced if they were no  longer eligible to work in Guam and that hiring other foreign workers in  Guam involves difficult visa processes. Compact migrants tend to hold  entry-level and low-skill jobs in Guam and have high turnover rates,  according to representatives from one company. Several businesses  in Guam were founded by, or cater to, compact migrants, according to  private sector representatives.

Hawaii. Micronesian officials noted that established communities of compact migrants in Hawaii help other FAS citizens to migrate, network, and find job opportunities. FAS community members in Hawaii identified multiple local businesses that either are owned by compact migrants or employ a large number of compact migrants.

Oregon. In Oregon, some compact migrants work as caregivers or in a plant manufacturing reusable plastic containers for food storage and transport, according to an FAS official and community members. Oregon state government officials noted that compact migrants play an important role in working with adults and children with intellectual and developmental disabilities and in other paid caregiver capacities. The Governor of Oregon noted that compact migrants bring a tremendous amount of value to Oregon communities as educators, social workers, caregivers, and as members of the U.S. military. Other jobs or industries in which compact migrants work include warehousing, fast-food restaurants, and airport jobs, according to FAS officials.

Washington. Some compact migrants work in caregiving, including at senior care homes; in manufacturing, warehousing, fast-food restaurants, or nonprofits; as artisans; or at airports, according to state and FAS officials and FAS community members.

Workforce Challenges Faced by Compact Migrants

Stakeholders reported that compact migrants have encountered various  challenges related to participation in the U.S. workforce. See appendix VII  for additional challenges experienced by compact migrant communities.

Form I-94. Compact migrants from Micronesia and the Marshall Islands may present an unexpired FAS passport and Form I-94 Arrival/Departure Record (known as Form I-94) to employers to demonstrate their identity and employment authorizations. Before 2013, compact migrants entering the United States received a paper copy of the form to document their legal entry and their ability to legally reside indefinitely in the United States. The DHS transition in  2013 from issuing Forms I-94 on paper to issuing them electronically  created challenges for compact migrants, according to FAS  community members. According to consulate officials, communities  were not adequately notified that DHS would maintain these records  in publicly accessible databases for only 5 years. As a result, some  compact migrants who entered the United States after mid-2013 did  not download their Forms I-94 before they became unavailable and  thus did not have a Form I-94 to show to employers, according to  stakeholders we interviewed.

REAL ID–compliant driver’s licenses. Some employers require  employees to have REAL ID–compliant driver’s licenses, according to  FAS officials and community members. Before September 2019, DHS  required compact migrants and other nonimmigrants applying for a  REAL ID–compliant driver’s license to present an unexpired passport  with an unexpired visa and Form I-94 or to present an employment  authorization document. However, because compact migrants do not  receive a visa and are not otherwise required to obtain an  employment authorization document, they were unable to obtain the  licenses. In September 2019, DHS changed its requirements  specifically to allow compact migrants to receive REAL ID–compliant  driver’s licenses by presenting an unexpired passport and Form I- 94. Some compact migrants in Guam said that challenges related to  REAL ID before the DHS regulation change had negatively affected  their employment because some military base jobs required these  documents for employment or for base access. In addition, some  compact migrants have lost jobs at airports because of difficulty in  obtaining REAL ID–compliant identification, according to Marshallese  embassy officials. See appendix X for information about legislative  and DHS policy changes that affected compact migrants’ ability to  access full-term REAL ID–compliant driver’s licenses and  identification cards.

Commercial driver’s licenses. Various stakeholders discussed  difficulties that compact migrants had encountered in obtaining  commercial driver’s licenses required by certain jobs and obtaining  standard driver’s licenses that are compliant with REAL ID  requirements in some states. Marshallese officials said that compact  migrants’ inability to obtain or renew commercial driver’s licenses had  prevented them from being able to work in related jobs, such as truck  driving.

Labor abuse and discrimination. In September 2019, the  government of Micronesia requested that the Department of State  provide assistance to investigate abuse and mistreatment of  Micronesian citizens who were recruited to move to the United States  to work for a U.S. company in Iowa. In addition, compact migrants in  Hawaii, Guam, and Oregon told us that they had faced workplace  discrimination or were seen as harming the local economy. For  example, compact migrants in Guam said that they had experienced  discrimination in hiring and pay and sometimes were made to feel like  a burden on the community. Additionally, a March 2019 report by  the Hawaii Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil  Rights concluded that some compact migrants find it difficult to report  workplace discrimination because they are concerned about  retaliation from employers. The report found, among other things,  that compact migrants face discrimination in access to employment  and housing and also face widespread negative public perception in  Hawaii.

Stakeholders expressed some concerns about compact migration with  respect to public health and law enforcement interactions. In addition to  participating in the workforce, compact migrants participate in social  institutions and create diversity and cultural exchange in their receiving  communities.

State and territorial health department officials and health care providers  in the U.S. areas we visited noted concerns about the prevalence of  communicable diseases such as tuberculosis and Hansen’s disease in  compact migrant communities.

Tuberculosis. State and territorial health departments have worked  to identify and treat cases of active and latent tuberculosis in compact  migrant communities. About 15 to 20 percent of active, communicable  tuberculosis cases in Hawaii have occurred in the FAS community,  including several cases of antimicrobial drug–resistant variants of  tuberculosis, according to Hawaii government officials. In 2019, 23  communicable tuberculosis cases were diagnosed in compact  migrants in Hawaii. In Arkansas, public health officials estimated that  they had screened 30 percent of the Marshallese population since  2000 and reported 202 active cases and 500 cases of latent  tuberculosis infection between 1997 and 2019. Arkansas officials also  said that they screened 1,728 Marshallese and reported five cases of  active disease and 95 cases of tuberculosis infection in fiscal years  2018 and 2019. In 2017 and 2018, Arkansas officials traveled to the  Marshall Islands to conduct screening for active and latent  tuberculosis in addition to diabetes and Hansen’s disease.

Hansen’s disease. Hansen’s disease affects some members of  compact migrant communities, according to health care providers and  state government officials. For example, the Hawaii Department of  Health has a registry of 281 patients who are on active treatment or  monitoring for recurrence of Hansen’s disease or complications from  the disease. The department manages 10 to 20 new cases of  Hansen’s disease each year. According to Hawaii public health  officials, 95 percent of the individuals diagnosed with Hansen’s  disease in the state were from the Micronesian or Marshallese  communities. From 2003 to 2019, the Arkansas Department of Health  reported that 54 individuals, including 42 compact migrants, had been  diagnosed with Hansen’s disease.

Public Order and Law Enforcement Interactions

Some stakeholders reported concerns regarding public order and law  enforcement interactions with compact migrants in Guam, Hawaii, and  Washington.

Guam. Guam law enforcement agencies report on crimes committed  by, or attributed to, FAS groups in each location. Guam private sector  representatives we interviewed expressed a belief that social tension  with the FAS communities was driven in part by some compact  migrants’ public drunkenness or violence. In addition, language  barriers can hinder compact migrants’ social integration into receiving  communities, according to Guam law enforcement officials.

Hawaii. Common offenses for which compact migrants are cited or  arrested in Hawaii include quality-of-life or social-order offenses, such  as trespassing, disorderly conduct, drinking in public or driving under  the influence of alcohol, assault, or harassment, according to state  officials. These interactions with the public or with law enforcement  officials may contribute to a strained relationship between compact  migrants and receiving communities. Hawaii officials estimated that 20  to 25 percent of the population using the state’s homeless services  self-identify as part of the FAS community. Compact migrants may  sleep in public parks, which can lead to legal charges. A lack of  affordable housing may be a cause for homelessness among FAS  communities.

Washington. Marshallese embassy officials cited sporadic problems  with gang activity and drug use among some younger Marshallese  community members, particularly those living in Washington. These  officials suggested that some migrant children who feel bullied or  pressured may band together, resulting in a negative or gang-like  situation.

In some U.S. areas we visited, stakeholders we interviewed said that  compact migrants seek to contribute to, or engage with, their surrounding  U.S. communities through volunteer work, including church activities,  environmental work, and other efforts. For example, FAS communities  described participating in environmental cleanup efforts, including efforts  to control invasive species and leveraging their agricultural knowledge to  help Hawaiian farmers grow a more resilient variety of taro. Several  community representatives in multiple states noted that some compact  migrants spend a significant amount of time supporting their fellow  community members as translators or interpreters or volunteering to help  others navigate complex systems in U.S. areas. FAS citizens also serve  in the U.S. military. The FAS countries have a high rate of military service,  according to FAS officials and State documentation.

Stakeholders in some U.S. areas we visited described compact migrant  populations as contributing to the diversity of receiving communities and  educational institutions. For example, University of Guam officials said  that FAS student association groups sponsor cultural events and activities  that help to define the character of the university. The officials also noted  that FAS students contribute to research portfolios and bring FAS  government and community perspectives to classroom discussions. The  officials observed that the presence of compact migrants increases the  university community’s diversity and its cultural awareness and  competency. In Arkansas, Marshallese community members said that  they had helped to teach local U.S. residents about Marshallese culture  and history not otherwise taught in U.S. schools. Marshallese community  members in Arkansas also expressed a belief that the community brought  a greater emphasis on family and respect for elders to the region.

Agency Comments, Third-Party Views, and Our Evaluation

We provided a draft of this report for review and comment to the  Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Health and Human Services,  Homeland Security, Housing and Urban Development, the Interior, State,  and Transportation; the Social Security Administration; the Governors of  Hawaii, Guam, the CNMI, Arkansas, Oregon, and Washington; and the  Ambassadors of Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, and Palau to the  United States. The Departments of Agriculture, Health and Human  Services, Homeland Security, and State and the Social Security  Administration provided technical comments, which we incorporated as  appropriate. The Departments of Commerce, Housing and Urban  Development, the Interior, and Transportation did not provide comments.  U.S. areas and the FAS Ambassadors provided written comments that we  have summarized below and reproduced in appendixes XI through XIX,  and responded to their comments, where appropriate, at the end of those  appendixes.

Hawaii. The government of Hawaii commented that the health and  economic impacts of the coronavirus pandemic, in addition to Hawaii’s  high cost of living and public charge concerns, affect the state’s  compact migrant communities in particular. The government also  observed that racial disparities and other determinants of health and  well-being are exacerbated for compact migrants. Noting that compact  migrants lack access to Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition  Assistance Program, the government urged that compact migrants’  access to health care and food nutrition programs be treated as a  federal priority.

Guam. The government of Guam advocated, in the context of the  coronavirus pandemic, for restoring debt relief provisions associated  with compact migration to offset unreimbursed compact expenses.  The government noted that from the time the compacts went into  effect until 1996, FAS citizens maintained access to federal health  coverage. The government also commented that in 2017, Interior’s  Office of Insular Affairs reported to Congress that restoring this  eligibility would be in line with Congress’ intent to never cause  adverse consequences to the territories and Hawaii. In addition, the  government observed that moving compact migrants from Guam’s  locally funded Medically Indigent Program to Medicaid would help  Guam provide government services to all residents who need them.  The government of Guam noted that the ongoing absence of an  agreed definition for compact migrant for the purposes of data  collection creates confusion.

CNMI. The government of the CNMI commented on the importance of  compact migrants’ contributions to the territory’s workforce needs and  noted that they enrich the cultural makeup of the CNMI. Separately,  the government stated that the response to the enumeration error  discovered by the U.S. Census Bureau that led to a misallocation of  compact impact funds has penalized the territories. According to  Interior’s modified plan, future allocations to the CNMI (in addition to  Guam and American Samoa) would be adjusted downward to account  for past overpayment. The CNMI commented that reducing the future  amounts of compact impact funds because of an error of the federal  government does not recognize the present needs of the CNMI. The  CNMI government also noted that the territories receive less data  collection support from the American Community Survey, the U.S.  Bureau of Economic Analysis, and the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics  than other U.S. areas receive.

Arkansas. The government of Arkansas commented that it  considered the Census Bureau data in our report to underestimate the  compact migrant population in Arkansas, and it cited several higher  estimates. The government noted that the state does not receive  compact funding, despite its high population of Marshallese, because  it is not an affected jurisdiction as defined in the Compacts of Free  Association Amendments Act of 2003. The government projected that  approximately 12,000 compact migrants reside in Arkansas and  estimated its annual costs related to compact migration at about $72  million. We believe that the Census Bureau data are sufficiently  reliable for our purposes of estimating the number of compact  migrants in U.S. areas. However, our report includes a discussion of  stakeholder concerns that the compact migrant population in  Arkansas may have been undercounted. We reported that the Census  Bureau had estimated the compact migrant population in Arkansas  during the period 2013 to 2017 at 5,895 on the basis of the definition  of “compact migrants” used for its enumerations—citizens of  Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, and Palau who entered the United  States after 1986 (from Micronesia and the Marshall Islands) or 1994  (from Palau) and their U.S.-born children (biological, adopted, and  step-) and grandchildren younger than 18 years.

Oregon. The government of Oregon advocated for more reporting on  the effects that U.S. military access to, and U.S. testing of 67 nuclear  weapons in, the Marshall Islands has had on compact migration, citing  the devastating impact of nuclear fallout on inhabitants’ health and the  environment. The government of Oregon also cited a need to report  on compact migrants’ positive contributions to receiving areas. Our  report provides qualitative descriptions of compact migrants’  contributions, including budgetary, workforce, and social contributions,  and also provides high-level data on estimated mean and median  incomes among compact migrants. We have incorporated additional  statements by the government of Oregon about compact migrant  contributions in our report. The government noted that it has taken  steps at the state level to provide health care access to compact  migrant populations while also urging Congress to restore this  populations’ access to federal programs such as Medicaid and  Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. Further, the government  called on Interior to expand the definition of “affected jurisdiction” and  appropriate grant funds equitably. As we note in our report, this  definition and the associated grant funding were established by  Congress in the amended compacts’ implementing legislation.

Washington. The government of Washington commented that our  report did not provide a detailed history of U.S. military nuclear testing  in the FASs and subsequent impacts on them and their citizens. The  government noted that such information is necessary to explain FAS  citizens’ current challenges and why additional resources are required  to meet their needs. Further, the government commented that our  report omits the personal narratives that are critical to a holistic  account of the FAS experience in the United States, including the  struggles many compact migrants face. Our report incorporates  information that we obtained through our interviews with members of  compact migrant communities, including those in Washington, such  as reasons for migration, workforce and other challenges they faced,  and stakeholder suggestions for improving experiences or outcomes  of compact migration (see app. VII). The government of Washington  stated that it hoped our report would prompt the federal government to  make additional resources available to U.S. areas with sizeable  compact migrant populations, and it called for inclusion of Washington  among affected jurisdictions receiving compact impact grant funding.

Micronesia. The Embassy of the Federated States of Micronesia  emphasized the importance of quantifying not only costs but also  economic benefits of compact migration, including job creation, taxes  paid, and community contributions. The embassy also called for  guidelines and enumeration methods that better capture actual costs  and revenue. The embassy noted the relationship between FAS  citizens’ ineligibility for federal programs such as Medicaid and the  costs borne by local governments and communities in the absence of  these federal programs. According to the embassy, the continuing  challenge of Micronesian citizens’ ineligibility for Medicaid since 1996,  compounded by the effects of relevant social determinants of health,  make their successful integration in U.S. areas more difficult. Noting  that these circumstances have a direct effect on Micronesian  migrants’ ability to contribute positively in receiving areas and become  less reliant on public assistance programs, the embassy expressed  support for the restoration of FAS citizens’ eligibility for Medicaid and  for expanded veterans’ health care in Micronesia. The embassy  commented that compact impact grant funding is a domestic issue  and that discussions related to this issue should not diminish the  priority of ongoing U.S. assistance to Micronesia under the compact.  The embassy also raised concerns about challenges facing compact  migrants, including the challenges described in our report.

Marshall Islands. The Embassy of the Republic of the Marshall  Islands described the migration rights provided in the compact as  fundamental and essential to its country’s relationship with the United  States. Additionally, the embassy observed that restoring Medicaid  eligibility for its citizens living and working in the United States would  greatly benefit its citizens and substantially reduce impact costs to  certain areas. The embassy noted that, although Marshall Islands  citizens living in the United States are eligible to purchase individual  market health insurance plans through exchanges established under  the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, many who are  employed lack access to affordable health care because of the limited  insurance benefits offered by most service industries or the high cost  of covering family members. Furthermore, the embassy called for an  objective accounting of revenue received from compact migrants and  depiction of their contributions to, for example, the health and food  security of the United States through employment in the food  processing industry and other essential work. Last, the embassy  commented that the addition of Marshallese workers to the 2020  census effort may remedy the potential undercounting of its citizens in  the previous census.

Palau. The Embassy of the Republic of Palau observed that it would  be helpful to know the number of compact migrants from each FAS  country who are able to access the federal programs for which they  are eligible. This question was outside the scope of our review.  Further, the embassy commented that it would like the U.S. federal  government to inform and educate state departments of motor  vehicles regarding the special status of FAS citizens in the United  States, and it highlighted the difficulties that compact migrants  historically have faced in obtaining REAL ID–compliant identification.

We are sending copies of this report to the appropriate congressional  committees and to the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Health  and Human Services, Homeland Security, Housing and Urban  Development, the Interior, State, and Transportation; the Social Security  Administration; and the Governors of Arkansas, the CNMI, Guam, Hawaii,  Oregon, and Washington; and the Ambassadors of Micronesia, the  Marshall Islands, and Palau. In addition, the report is available at no  charge on the GAO website at https://www.gao.gov.

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact  me at (202) 512-3149 or gootnickd@gao.gov. Contact points for our  Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on  the last page of this report. GAO staff who made key contributions to this  report are listed in appendix XX.

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

We were asked to review topics related to migration to U.S. areas from  the freely associated states (FAS)—the Federated States of Micronesia  (Micronesia), the Republic of the Marshall Islands (Marshall Islands), and  the Republic of Palau (Palau)—under those countries’ compacts of free  association with the United States. This report (1) presents estimates of  compact migrant populations and describes recent trends in compact  migration; (2) summarizes the reported costs related to compact  migration (compact impact costs) in three affected jurisdictions—Hawaii,  Guam, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI);  and (3) describes effects of compact migration on governments,  workforces, and societies in these and other U.S. areas.

To present estimates of compact migrant populations in U.S. areas and  describe recent trends in compact migration, we obtained special  tabulations of data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2013-2017 American  Community Survey (ACS) for the 50 U.S. states, the District of Columbia,  and Puerto Rico. For Guam and the CNMI—U.S. territories that are not  covered by the ACS—we used the Census Bureau’s revised 2018  enumeration of compact migrants in these areas. The special  tabulations of ACS data and the Census Bureau’s 2013 and 2018  enumeration reports defined compact migrants as individuals residing in  U.S. areas who were born in the FASs and entered the United States  after 1986 (for Micronesia and the Marshall Islands) or 1994 (for Palau)  and their U.S.-born children (biological, adopted, step-) and grandchildren  younger than 18 years. We calculated percentage changes in states  and territories that had more than 1,000 estimated compact migrants (or  were designated as affected jurisdictions by the 2003 compacts’  implementing legislation) by comparing 2005-2009 ACS data and the  2008 enumeration with 2013-2017 ACS data and the revised 2018  enumeration.

To identify and describe changes in Census Bureau methods and  definitions for enumerating compact migrants over time (see app. VI), we  reviewed the definitions of “compact migrant” in the bureau’s enumeration  reports for tabulations before and including 2018. We also interviewed  Census Bureau and Department of the Interior (Interior) officials. For  example, we asked when and where grandchildren were counted among  compact migrants younger than 18 years.

To estimate net arrivals to U.S. areas by travelers with FAS passports  (see app. III), we analyzed data from the Department of Homeland  Security’s (DHS) Customs and Border Protection’s (CBP) Arrival and  Departure Information System (ADIS). According to CBP officials, ADIS  consolidates data from several DHS systems to create unique, person- centric travel records for all travelers regardless of citizenship. We  calculated monthly FAS net arrivals to U.S. areas from 2017 through  2019 by using ADIS data that DHS provided, showing numbers of  individuals with FAS-issued passports entering and exiting U.S. ports of  entry each month during the period.

To assess the reliability of ADIS data, we spoke with DHS officials to  identify potential data reliability concerns and other limitations of ADIS.  Officials said that any compact migrant who enters on an FAS passport  and holds U.S. citizenship will be masked or not appear in the ADIS  system. Officials also said that compact migrants who become U.S.  citizens after arrival or are later discovered to be U.S. citizens are  removed from the data; CBP officials believed these numbers to be small.  We also conducted statistical checks for consistency and completeness  of the ADIS data, including validating the ADIS data against publicly  available passenger data from the U.S. Department of Transportation Air  Carrier Statistics (TranStats) T-100 database for 2015 to 2019 (data for  2019 were partial). We used flight segment data from the T-100 database  containing total passenger counts reported by both U.S. and foreign air  carriers for flights that compact migrants take to U.S. areas. We found  that data from ADIS and the T-100 database were positively correlated for  2015, 2017, 2018, and 2019 but were not correlated for 2016. According  to CBP officials, ADIS was significantly changed in 2016 and may contain  duplicate entries for that year. As a result, we determined that ADIS data  for 2017 and later were sufficiently reliable for our intended use.

Reported Costs Related to Compact Migration

To quantify costs related to compact migration that were reported by the  affected jurisdictions included in our review—Hawaii, Guam, and the  CNMI—we reviewed documents that they had published or provided to  Interior, such as compact impact reports submitted by Hawaii and Guam  and grant documents submitted by the CNMI. We used the most recent  data available for 2004 through 2018. To identify the amount of funding  distributed by Interior as compact impact grants to the affected  jurisdictions, we interviewed Interior officials and reviewed relevant  documentation.

Effects of Compact Migration on Governments, Workforces, and Societies

To identify and describe effects of compact migration on governments,  workforces, and societies of receiving U.S. areas, we reviewed relevant  documentation and conducted interviews with stakeholders in six U.S.  areas that we visited.

Documentation that we reviewed included program information and  counts of compact migrants using state-level benefits programs,  treated by state or local health clinics, enrolled in public schools or  higher-education institutions, or using interpreters. Because various  sources may define compact migrants by ethnicity, place of birth,  language of origin, or other metrics, we noted the definition used for  each count in this report. To identify the eligibility of compact migrants  for selected federal programs, we reviewed relevant statutes and  regulations and held discussions with officials from the U.S. agencies  that oversee the programs. We selected the programs included in  table 1 on the basis of those we included in a prior report, and we  added other selected programs that we learned about in the course of  interviews for our current report.

We traveled to, and interviewed stakeholders in, six U.S. states and  territories where compact migrants live, including three of the U.S.  areas designated in the 2003 amended compacts’ implementing  legislation as affected jurisdictions—Hawaii, Guam, and the CNMI— and three mainland states—Arkansas, Oregon, and Washington.  We selected these areas on the basis of previously reported compact  migrant population distributions in U.S. areas and of the locations of  consulates or honorary consuls established by Micronesia, the  Marshall Islands, and Palau. Stakeholders we interviewed included  officials from nine federal agencies; state and territorial government  officials in areas we visited; private sector and nonprofit organization  representatives such as chambers of commerce, employers of  compact migrants, and nonprofit service providers; officials from the  FAS embassies and consulates or honorary consuls in areas we  visited; and compact migrants living in areas we visited (see table  8). FAS embassy officials in Washington, D.C., connected us with  local community members who helped us promote and organize the  local community meetings in areas we visited. Participants whom we  interviewed in the meetings do not represent a generalizable sample  of compact migrants, and the challenges they discussed are not  comprehensive (see app. VII for a discussion of challenges faced by  compact migrants, according to stakeholders we interviewed).

To describe academic studies of workforce and fiscal impacts of new  migrants (see app. IX), we conducted a search, using keywords relevant  to the economic impact of migration, in American and European  economics academic journals published during the period 2015 to 2019.  We reviewed a subset of these articles that we deemed most relevant to  the context of compact migration, including articles that related to  migration of lower-skilled workers and that included empirical analysis of  the impact of this migration on various economic aspects. We also  reviewed survey articles reviewing the conclusions of prior relevant  publications.

We conducted this performance audit from March 2019 through June  2020 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing  standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to  obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for  our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe  that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings  and conclusions based on our audit objectives.

Appendix II: Estimates of Compact Migrants in U.S. Areas

Table 9 presents Census Bureau data for U.S. states and territories that  had estimated compact migrant populations of more than 1,000 in 2013  through 2018 and shows percentage changes in these populations from  2005-2009 to 2013-2018. Data for U.S. areas not covered by the  American Community Survey, including Guam, the Commonwealth of the  Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI), and American Samoa, are from  compact migration enumerations that the Census Bureau performed on  behalf of the Department of the Interior.

According to 5-year data from the Census Bureau’s 2013-2017 American  Community Survey, 72,965 compact migrants resided in the 50 U.S.  states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. (The American  Community Survey does not cover American Samoa, the CNMI, Guam,  or the U.S. Virgin Islands.)

For estimates of the number of compact migrants in each of the 50 U.S.  states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico, see table 10.

The American Community Survey captures, among other things,  respondents’ place of birth (by country) and state of residence. Table 11  provides Census Bureau estimates, using 2013-2017 American  Community Survey data, of the numbers of compact migrants born in the  freely associated states—the Federated States of Micronesia, the  Republic of the Marshall Islands, and the Republic of Palau—and residing  in each of the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico.

Appendix III: Federal Travel Data Showing Compact Migration to U.S. Areas

From 2017 through 2019, an average of about 366 more migrants from  the Federated States of Micronesia (Micronesia), Republic of the Marshall  Islands (Marshall Islands), and Republic of Palau (Palau) arrived in U.S.  areas per month (4,390 per year) than departed, according to the  Department of Homeland Security’s Customs and Border Protection’s  Arrival and Departure Information System (ADIS). As figure 8 shows,  this trend was driven by migrants from Micronesia and the Marshall  Islands (3,343 and 1,487 per year on average, respectively). Each year  during this period, an average of about 440 more Palauan citizens  departed from the United States than arrived.

Appendix IV: Demographics and Characteristics of Compact Migrants in the 50 U.S. States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico

The Census Bureau’s American Community Survey is an ongoing survey  that provides information on a yearly basis, including employment status,  educational attainment, veteran status, and age of survey respondents,  among other topics. The survey covers the 50 U.S. states, the District of  Columbia, and Puerto Rico. (The survey does not cover American  Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, or  the U.S. Virgin Islands.)

Some data for compact migrant populations are available through the  American Community Survey. See table 12 for demographic information  about compact migrant populations in the 50 U.S. states, the District of  Columbia, and Puerto Rico in 2013 to 2017.

See table 13 for demographic information about the compact migrant  population in Hawaii only.

Appendix V: Compact Impact Costs Reported by Hawaii, Guam, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands

Since 1986, Hawaii, Guam, and the Commonwealth of the Northern  Mariana Islands (CNMI) have submitted to the Department of the Interior  (Interior) intermittent compact impact reports and other documents that  include descriptions of, and estimated costs for, education, health, public  safety, and social services that local government agencies provided to  compact migrants. Hawaii and Guam have submitted compact impact  reports, which are available on Interior’s Office of Insular Affairs’  website. The CNMI has not submitted a compact impact report since  fiscal year 2003 but reports compact impact costs to Interior in the  CNMI’s annual plan for the use of compact impact grants. Table 14  shows the estimated costs that these affected jurisdictions reported to  Interior or provided to us for 1986 through 2018.

Appendix VI: Compact Migrant Enumeration Methods, Definitions, and Error

The Census Bureau, working under an interagency agreement with the  Department of the Interior (Interior), has conducted six sets of  enumerations of compact migrants in affected jurisdictions for the  purpose of allocating compact impact grant funding and has performed  the enumerations every 5 years. Enumeration methods and definitions  have changed over time. During the course of our work, an error was  discovered that affected the accuracy of the 2013 and 2018 enumerations  and also affected Interior’s allocations of compact impact grants for  several fiscal years.

Census Bureau methods of gathering new data or analyzing existing data  for compact migrant enumerations on behalf of Interior have changed  over time. In 1993,1998, and 2003, the bureau used the “snowball”  technique; in 2008, 2013, and 2018, the bureau employed a two-pronged  approach.

For enumerations in 1993, 1998, and 2003, the Census Bureau  employed a survey method known as snowball sampling to count  compact migrants in Hawaii, Guam, and the Commonwealth of the  Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI). Because the surveys relied on  referrals by respondents to identify new respondents, they were likely  to undercount compact migrants who were not referred.

For the enumerations in 2008, 2013, and 2018, the Census Bureau  used a combination of existing and new survey data to count or  estimate the numbers of compact migrants in Hawaii, Guam, and the  CNMI. However, for the enumerations in Hawaii, the bureau used a  different approach than it used for the enumerations in Guam and the  CNMI. Also, for the enumerations in Guam and the CNMI, the bureau  used a different approach in 2013 than it used in 2008 and 2018. To  estimate the number of compact migrants in Hawaii, the Census  Bureau used existing American Community Survey data. To estimate  the numbers of compact migrants in Guam and the CNMI, the bureau  used existing decennial census data in 2013 and gathered new  survey data in 2008 and 2018.

See table 15 for a summary of the enumeration methods that the Census  Bureau has used over time.

Definitions of “Compact Migrant” Used in Enumerations

The definition of “compact migrant” that the Census Bureau used for the  enumerations has changed over time. Each enumeration has counted as  a compact migrant any individual, of any age, who was born in the  Federated States of Micronesia (Micronesia), the Republic of the Marshall  Islands (Marshall Islands), or the Republic of Palau (Palau) and who  entered the United States after the effective date of their country’s  compact. However, the enumerations in 2003, in 2008, and in 2013 and  2018 used various criteria for counting U.S.-born (U.S. citizen) individuals  as children of compact migrants and therefore as compact migrants.  2003 enumeration. The definition of “compact migrant” in the 2003  amended compacts’ implementing legislation indicates that the children of  compact migrants were to be considered compact migrants until 18 years  of age. Interior interpreted the legislation’s definition of “compact migrant”  as including all children younger than 18 years who were born to a  compact migrant or migrants in the United States, thus including some  U.S. citizens.  2008 enumeration. For the 2008 enumeration, the Census Bureau, on  behalf of Interior, counted as compact migrants all children (biological,  adopted, and step-) younger than 18 years who were born in the United  States to a compact migrant head of household or to his or her spouse,  were adopted by a compact migrant head of household or by his or her  spouse, or were stepchildren of a compact migrant head of household or  of his or her spouse.  2013 and 2018 enumerations. Starting with the 2013 enumeration, the  Census Bureau also began counting as compact migrants all children (biological, adopted, and step-) younger than 18 years  who were born in the United States to a compact migrant or to his or  her spouse, regardless of whether they were the children of the head  of household or of his or her spouse, and all grandchildren of a compact migrant who were younger than 18  years, regardless of whether they were the grandchildren of the head  of household or of his or her spouse.

Also starting with the 2013 enumeration, the Census Bureau introduced a  requirement that to be counted as a compact migrant, a child or  grandchild of a compact migrant must never have been married. For a  summary of “compact migrant” definitions used for the enumerations over  time, see table 16.

Compact Migrant Enumeration Results, 1993-2018

The six sets of enumerations of compact migrants that the Census  Bureau conducted on behalf of Interior in affected jurisdictions from 1993  through 2018 showed these populations growing in Hawaii and Guam  and fluctuating in the CNMI. During our work with the Census Bureau to  obtain American Community Survey data related to compact migrant  populations, bureau officials discovered a programming error in the 2013  and 2018 enumerations of compact migrants that had resulted in an  underestimate of certain compact migrants in Hawaii. The bureau revised  these estimates in October 2019 to correct for the error in Hawaii. Figure  9 shows the Census Bureau’s revised estimates of compact migrants in  the affected jurisdictions as of October 2019.

In February 2020, Interior requested that the Census Bureau further  revise its estimates for 2013 and 2018 to no longer count grandchildren.  As of March 2020, the results of this revision were not yet available.

Appendix VII: Stakeholder Suggestions to Address Challenges Related to Compact Migration

In the U.S. areas we visited, stakeholders from state and territorial  governments, private sector and nonprofit organizations, and freely  associated state (FAS) consulates and communities made suggestions  for improving experiences or outcomes of compact migration for both the  receiving areas and the migrants themselves. Stakeholders  recommended that some actions be taken in both the United States after  compact migrants’ arrival and in the FASs before the migrants’ departure.

Federal Policies, Operations, and Funding

Provide more information and education about the compacts.  Several stakeholders said that U.S. agencies should better understand  the compacts and coordinate their related work. These stakeholders,  including members of compact migrant communities, noted that U.S.  government officials in some cases have seemed uncertain or unaware  that compact migrants are able to live and work in U.S. areas without a  visa or other documentation and have asked them to present immigration  documents they do not possess or are not required to obtain. An FAS  official and community members noted a need for more education of  employers and state government officials regarding the migration terms of  the compacts and the migration status of FAS citizens in the United  States.

Restore Medicaid eligibility and expand benefits access. State  government officials and health care providers advocated restoring  Medicaid access to FAS populations. An FAS Consul General  advocated restoring Medicaid eligibility to its pre-1996 status for compact  migrants. FAS community members suggested extending  Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits and expanding  federal student loan access to compact migrants.

Provide more information and guidelines about federal programs  and policies. State government officials suggested that changes to  federal government policies should include specific information about the  applicability of the changes to FAS citizens. Health care providers  suggested that the federal government should share more data about  compact migration and noted a need for federally established guidelines  to support accurate, rather than exaggerated, cost reporting. The  providers noted that compact impact estimating was chaotic and had a  negative effect on the community. FAS community members expressed  interest in federally provided educational sessions and clear eligibility  criteria for federal benefits.

Simplify Form I-94 access for compact migrants. FAS consular  officials and community members said that compact migrants entering the  United States should receive information about the importance of their  Form I-94 Arrival/Departure Record (Form I-94) and how to retrieve it  online. Because compact migrants have had difficulty in accessing  these forms, and given the cost of replacing them, FAS community  members requested that federal agencies be enabled to retrieve  migrants’ Forms I-94 for them. FAS consular officials recommended that  compact migrants’ Forms I-94 be made accessible on the Customs and  Border Protection website indefinitely, not only for the current 5-year  period, since compact migrants’ forms do not expire.

Provide more and broader funding to U.S. states and territories.  State government officials, nonprofit representatives, and FAS community  members said that more federal funding and resources were needed to  accommodate the compact migrant population or to support the receiving  states and territories. State government officials also said that the federal  government should increase compact impact funds to a “reasonable  amount,” even if the full costs cannot be covered. They noted that the  compacts represent a federal obligation and expressed a belief that the  federal government should take care of compact migrants. According to  some health care providers, the United States’ treatment of the compact  migrant population in U.S. areas could affect the FASs’ compact  negotiations with the U.S. government. State government officials also  suggested that allowing compact migrants access to more federal  benefits would help alleviate compact impact on states and territories.

Clarify immigration provisions under the compacts of free  association. FAS community members in some locations we visited  expressed a need for clarification about the status of migration provisions  of the compacts. Specifically, they expressed concern that they might  have to leave the United States in 2023. For example, in one FAS  community we visited, community members registered confusion about  whether provisions of the compacts (including migration provisions) are  scheduled to end in 2023 and whether FAS citizens in U.S. areas can  become U.S. citizens. One community member expressed concern that  compact migrants would be “chased” out of U.S. areas after 2023 and  that “all of their rights” under the compacts would be revoked. FAS  community members also sought clarification about the implementation of  the DHS rule for considering public charge while determining admissibility  to U.S. areas. According to community members and other  stakeholders, the rule has caused uncertainty in compact migrant  communities, which may result in some compact migrants’ not enrolling  in, or unenrolling from, public benefits programs. FAS community  members said that they are uncertain whether and how the rule change  will apply to them and whether enrolling in public benefits or enrolling  eligible children will make them ineligible to reenter the United States.  FAS consular officials and community members also suggested revising  certain immigration provisions—for example, changing compact migrants’  nonimmigrant status to allow them access to a wider range of jobs,  including law enforcement and military officer positions.

Expand health care access and clinics in U.S. areas. State  government officials said they believed that more health education and  outreach to FAS communities were needed. A nonprofit representative  noted that FAS communities lack vision care and that the extension of  postpartum care to FAS communities would improve maternal and child  health. FAS community members suggested the creation of a Pacific  Islander–specific health clinic in the Pacific Northwest, with translators on  staff and on-site enrollment for health insurance. Representatives of a  nongovernmental organization in Hawaii that is led and staffed by  compact migrants noted that a series of changes in compact migrants’  eligibility for the Hawaii state health care program, Med-QUEST, had  caused confusion about compact migrants’ eligibility for public health care  benefits.

Address preventative care, dialysis needs, and communicable  diseases in the FASs. State and territorial government officials and  health care providers said that greater access to in-country care,  including more resources for primary care, was needed in the FASs. They  recommended making more preventative treatment available in the FASs,  including diabetes prevention, and establishing clinics in the FASs to  potentially reduce the number of individuals moving to the United States  for health care. Health care providers suggested that the Department of  the Interior (Interior) should produce or fund a study on dialysis in the  FASs, including an analysis of whether high-quality dialysis services in  the FASs would decrease migration solely for access to dialysis.  Territorial government officials suggested that compact migrants should  receive health screenings before departing for the United States to  identify any serious conditions or communicable diseases. Some health  care providers and state government officials proposed that the U.S.  federal government focus on reducing or eliminating the transmission of  tuberculosis in the FASs.

Compact Migrant Orientation and Services

Offer predeparture education to compact migrants in the FASs. State  government officials and nonprofit representatives suggested that videos  be aired on television in the FASs to support predeparture education, to  explain differences they would find in the United States, and to reduce  culture shock after arrival. Some state government officials and health  care providers suggested that FAS citizens be encouraged to gather  documentation, such as immunization and medical records, school  records, and anything necessary to obtain a U.S. driver’s license, before  departing for the United States. State government officials also suggested  that lists of community-based organizations, by U.S. state or territory and  city, be provided to FAS citizens before their departure.

Offer orientation and information to compact migrants arriving in the  United States. State government officials said that U.S. areas should  offer and fund location-specific orientations for FAS citizens after arrival.  The officials suggested that these orientations should cover how health  care eligibility works, what resources are available to compact migrants,  and how they can contact interpreters. State government officials also  said that proactive education about U.S. laws could help compact  migrants avoid behavior or circumstances that might cause them to run  afoul of the law, given cultural differences and misunderstandings. Health  care providers noted that compact migrants could be given more  information to encourage better nutritional choices and more exercise.

Expand and professionalize translation and interpretation  resources. Compact migrants who are not fluent in English may  experience challenges accessing or navigating health care, the judicial  system, and educational institutions, according to state government  officials, FAS consulate officials, private sector and nonprofit organization  representatives, and compact migrant communities. State government  officials reported frequent difficulty in finding interpreters and translators  for the multiple languages spoken by compact migrants. State  government officials recommended that grants be made available to help  pay for interpreters until more FAS community members graduate from  college and become qualified. The officials also said that interpreters  should be encouraged to develop greater proficiency in fields such as law  and medicine so that they can serve in multiple capacities. In addition, the  officials identified a need for more in-person interpreters in hospitals and  medical facilities. State government officials noted that FAS communities  speak many different languages, and they acknowledged the need for a  culturally-specific approach for each group. They said that, in addition to  translating content, interpreters should fully explain the context of  programs to ensure compact migrants’ understanding. FAS community  members proposed the creation of a group of paid, full-time interpreters  and a language certification requirement to guarantee the availability and  quality of language services.

Create “one-stop shops” with information and resources for  compact migrants. State government officials and health care providers  identified a need for one-stop shops—centers that serve compact migrant  populations—in areas that do not currently have them. According to  stakeholders in a U.S. state without such a center, a one-stop shop could  reduce duplication and increase coordination among the many groups  that serve the FAS community. Other stakeholders suggested that each  state government establish a single point of contact for compact migrants.  FAS community members and nonprofit representatives identified a need  for a cultural center or other physical space that could be used to hold  events and provide centralized communication and resources for the FAS  community in the Pacific Northwest, in particular.

Emphasize community-based approaches to supporting compact  migrants. State government officials noted the importance of community- based approaches to supporting compact migrants. For example,  stakeholders recommended hiring community health workers from the  FAS population to engage with their communities in U.S. areas.  According to the officials, community health workers, as known and  trusted entities, are better sources of information for FAS communities  than any government agency. The officials also acknowledged the  importance of engaging with FAS community leaders (including embassy  or consular officials and church leaders) in U.S. areas to successfully  connect with FAS community members.

Provide compact migrant–dedicated housing. State government  officials, FAS consulate officials, and nonprofit organization  representatives discussed discrimination that compact migrants  experienced in housing. For example, stakeholders in some areas we  visited described landlords who failed to maintain or repair housing  leased to compact migrants, who targeted compact migrants for evictions,  or who avoided renting units to compact migrants. Officials in one state  suggested that FAS communities need access to dedicated housing  options that align with their community traditions and cultural norms, such  as units that can accommodate large or multiple families.

Appendix VIII: Nonprofit and Private Sector Organizations Supporting Compact Migrants

Nonprofit organizations provide compact migrants with a range of  assistance, such as assistance with housing or rent, food, documentation  and legal matters, and enrollment in health insurance. Some  organizations, such as “one-stop shops” (i.e., centers serving compact  migrant populations), serve only compact migrants, while other  organizations serve compact migrants among other members of the  receiving community. Additionally, some companies that employ compact  migrants offer programs intended to help them adjust to life in the United  States. The information presented in this appendix is based mainly on  documentation provided by the organizations and interviews with their  representatives.

Nonprofit Organizations That Serve Compact Migrants Only

Several nonprofit organizations in U.S. areas that we visited target their  services to compact migrants. Two of these organizations—one-stop  shops in Hawaii and Guam—aim to support the compact migrant  communities by connecting the migrants to existing resources and, in  some cases, creating new programs and services to support freely  associated state (FAS) communities, according to nonprofit and  government officials and documentation. These one-stop shops  receive funding from the U.S. Department of the Interior (Interior) as well  as other governmental and nongovernmental sources.

In Guam, the Micronesian Resource Center One-Stop Shop was  developed with input from various communities in Guam and  government agencies and launched in October 2015, according to  one-stop shop officials and Interior documentation. The one-stop shop  has received an Interior grant each year starting in fiscal year 2016.  The amount of the grant has steadily increased, rising from $210,000  in fiscal year 2016 to $217,000 in fiscal year 2017, $250,000 in fiscal  year 2018, and $267,000 in fiscal year 2019, according to Interior  documentation and officials. The one-stop shop employs both case  workers and cultural mediators and uses a mobile van to bring  services directly to FAS communities, according to one-stop shop  officials. These services include outreach to communities, including  youths; workshops for parenting and driving; and assistance with lost  or replacement documentation. For example, when conflict escalated  among compact migrants living in a Guam apartment complex,  Interior and Guam officials noted that the one-stop shop worked with  police to facilitate meetings and participation in neighborhood watch  programs. The one-stop shop has hosted “Welcome to Guam”  orientations to educate compact migrants about finding housing,  setting up utilities, and opening a bank account in Guam; employees’  rights; medical insurance; deportable offenses; and the danger of  human trafficking, according to one-stop shop officials.

In Hawaii, the one-stop shop We Are Oceania was established with  Interior funding in 2015. The organization provides case management,  helping compact migrants to find jobs, address housing or legal  issues, and enroll in health insurance through Hawaii’s Premium  Assistance Program, according to one-stop shop officials and  documentation. We Are Oceania has also provided cultural  consultations and trainings to Hawaii public school teachers and  service providers to educate them about cultural differences and  potential challenges that compact migrants may face, according to  nonprofit representatives and documentation. The officials also said  that the organization hosts a youth summit and helped open a  newcomer welcome center at a middle school. Figure 10 shows  photos of the We Are Oceania facility, including desks where compact  migrants can apply for health insurance and other services.

Other nonprofit organizations were also founded specifically to assist the  compact migrant community in navigating various U.S. systems, such as  education and health care, and obtaining documentation such as driver’s  licenses or Forms I-94 Arrival/Departure Records.

The Arkansas Coalition of Marshallese in Springdale, Arkansas,  according to representatives of the organization, helps local compact  migrants with tasks such as retrieving new Forms I-94 from Customs  and Border Protection; translating state driver’s license applications  into Marshallese; providing education about diabetes prevention and  management; and enrolling compact migrant children in ARKids, the  state’s public health insurance program that extends federal health  insurance coverage for children younger than 19 years.

In 2018, the Micronesian Islander Community Organization in Oregon  announced a study among local compact migrants to identify barriers  that they faced in the region, such as a lack of certified health care  interpreters. Additionally, the Oregon-based COFA Alliance National  Network conducts policy and advocacy work aimed at supporting  compact migrant communities, according to representatives of the  organization.

Nonprofit Organizations That Serve Compact Migrants

Charities, legal services, and other programs assist compact migrants  and other eligible individuals in selected U.S. areas. For example:  In Hawaii, the Salvation Army of the Hawaiian and Pacific Islands  provides assistance with rent, utilities, and food; interpreters to assist  non–English speakers with accessing health and legal services; and  digital literacy training (e.g., how to use email), according to Salvation  Army officials. In Guam, the Salvation Army Guam Corps provides  assistance with rent, utilities, food, and clothing and also provides  case management services, according to Guam officials.

In the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI),  Karidat provides a food pantry, clothing assistance, rental assistance,  and victim advocacy, among other services. (Fig. 11 shows a public  bulletin board and donated clothing in Karidat’s offices.) In 2018,  compact migrants made up 20.4 percent of individuals accessing  Karidat’s food pantry and 39.5 percent of individuals receiving clothing  assistance, according to Karidat estimates.

The Hawaii and Arkansas chapters of the Legal Aid Society provide  legal services to local residents, such as victims of crime, according to  Hawaii and Arkansas officials. According to Hawaii chapter officials,  they served 569 compact migrants (8.5 percent of their total clients) in  fiscal year 2019.

The Asian Family Center within Oregon’s Immigrant and Refugee  Community Organization provides similar services, including defense  for parties engaged in deportation removal proceedings, according to  representatives of the organization.

Some employers with compact migrant workers provide employee  services, programs, or accommodations specific to these workers’ needs.  In Arkansas, Tyson, Inc., provides written materials in Marshallese and  operates a program that appoints chaplains to help the company’s  Marshallese workers, as well as other non–U.S. citizen employees,  navigate life in the United States generally and in Arkansas specifically,  according to private sector representatives. Additionally, the  representatives told us that the company provides free classes in financial  literacy and English as a second language to its employees, including  compact migrants. Another company in the region, Cargill Protein, has  partnered with local nongovernmental organizations to educate its  compact migrant employees about U.S. driving laws and help prepare  them for driver’s license tests.

Appendix IX: Review of Academic Studies of the Workforce Effects of Migration Similar to Compact Migration

We examined academic studies published from 2015 through 2019 to  determine what is known about the likely effects of migration similar to  compact migration on the workforces of receiving countries. Because we  were unable to identify articles published during this period that focused  specifically on compact migration, we focused our search on studies  examining the effects of migration by other groups with relatively few  skills.

Studies that we reviewed sometimes reached differing conclusions about  whether migration is associated with a negative, neutral, or positive effect  on the employment and earnings of nonmigrant workers in the receiving  countries. Some studies found that migration may result in worsened  employment prospects or wages—particularly in the short term and if the  influx of migrants is sudden—for nonmigrant workers who are most  similar to the migrants in terms of demographics and skills. If the  migrant workers are close substitutes for nonmigrants, they may intensify  competition for jobs, increasing unemployment and lowering wages for  such nonmigrant workers as well as for similar prior migrants. In the case  of compact migration, this might include younger and less educated  nonmigrants.

However, according to other studies and survey papers that we reviewed,  nonmigrants, both low and high skill, could benefit as a whole from  migration. For example, one study of the effects of migration on 20  countries found that both low- and high-skill nonmigrants clearly benefited  from an influx of migrant workers about two-thirds of the time.  Nonmigrant workers may benefit from migration if the migrant workers  specialize in different skills and vocations than the nonmigrant population,  leading to complementary effects from scale and specialization. For  example, larger numbers of construction workers may result in greater  efficiency and quality in the building of more restaurants and bars,  benefitting workers in nonconstruction trades as well as nonmigrant  investors and business owners.

Institutions may play an important role in determining the effects of  migration on the receiving country’s workforce. For example, a study  estimating the effect of migrant workers in European Union countries and  controlling for institutional and noninstitutional factors showed that the  effect of migrants varied between countries, driven in part by differences  in their institutional environment, such as the extent of unemployment  insurance, fiscal redistribution, and government spending on services and  public goods. This study found that, while fiscal redistribution to migrant  workers through taxation and unemployment benefits somewhat worsens  outcomes for nonmigrants, this effect is often outweighed by the  economic contribution of these migrants.

Distinctions in statistical methodologies and assumptions may explain  studies’ seemingly contradictory conclusions about the effects of  migration on the workforce of receiving countries. According to a survey  paper reviewing other previously published work, the statistical controls  selected for studies of the impact of migration can result in subtle but  economically important distinctions in what the studies attempt to  measure, such as the total effects of migration on a given region or the  effects of migration on a specific group (e.g., a particular education or skill  group). According to this and a second survey paper we reviewed,  contradictory conclusions may also result from differing assumptions  about factors such as the extent to which migrants “downskill” (compete  for jobs for which they may be overqualified) and, therefore, about the  nonmigrants that should be used as a comparison group to examine the  effect of migrants of a particular skill and education level. According to  a third survey paper we reviewed, studies also vary in whether they  measure the shorter- or longer-term effects of migration; the survey found  that negative effects are more often reported when studies measure  migration’s shorter-term effects.

Academic journal articles that we examined also discuss the potential  fiscal effect of migration. Several studies argue that evaluations of  migration’s fiscal effect should consider the potential effects over multiple  generations and should also consider the indirect fiscal effect of migrants’  influence on native workers. For example, a panel discussion report of the  National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine states that  descendants of immigrants are often studied only as children, in cross- sectional data providing a point-in-time snapshot. As a result,  according to the report, the average immigrant household is counted as a  net fiscal burden in part because young children of immigrants, like the  children of natives, receive public education. The report stated that  studying the descendants of immigrants as they complete their education,  become workers, and start paying taxes provides a more complete  measure of migration’s fiscal effect, because such an analysis may  include not only the cost of their education but also the delayed fiscal  benefits of that education: larger tax payments made possible by the  investment in human capital that education represents. Another paper  we reviewed argues that because migrant workers can positively  influence the upward mobility of native workers, the higher taxable  income from these native workers should be considered, in addition to the  low taxable income of the migrants, to avoid negatively biasing the  estimated fiscal effect of migrants.

Appendix X: Compact Migrant Eligibility for, and Access to, REAL ID–Compliant Identification

The REAL ID Act, passed by Congress in 2005, set minimum document  requirements and issuance standards for driver’s licenses and personal  identification cards. The act also prohibits federal agencies from  accepting for certain purposes driver’s licenses and identification cards  from states that do not meet the act’s minimum standards. Citizens of the  freely associated states (FAS)—the Federated States of Micronesia, the  Republic of the Marshall Islands, and the Republic of Palau—have always  been eligible for REAL ID–compliant driver’s licenses or identification.  However, the term of the licenses’ or identification’s validity and the  documents that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) required to  establish compact migrants’ identity have varied over time. Currently,  compact migrants are eligible for full-term REAL ID–compliant  identification. Since September 2019, they have been required to present  an unexpired FAS passport and the most recent Form I-94  Arrival/Departure Record (Form I-94) as evidence of identity to obtain the  identification.

Compact Migrant Eligibility for, and Access to, REAL ID–Compliant Identification

DHS regulations previously required compact migrants to provide  documents they were not required to have. Before September 2019,  DHS required compact migrants applying for REAL ID–compliant  identification to present, in addition to their unexpired foreign passport  and Form I-94, either an unexpired U.S. visa (affixed to the passport) or  an employment authorization document (EAD). However, under the  compacts of free association, compact migrants are not required to obtain  a visa or an EAD. On September 4, 2019, DHS modified its policy,  designating an unexpired passport from one of the FAS countries, in  combination with an individual’s most recent Form I-94, as acceptable  evidence of identity that compact migrants may present to obtain REAL  ID–compliant identification.

Federal law previously restricted the term of the REAL ID–compliant  identification that compact migrants could receive. Before December  2018, compact migrants were eligible to receive temporary, limited-term  REAL ID–compliant identification, valid until the expiration date on their  EAD, which could be a maximum of 5 years, according to DHS officials.  In December 2018, the REAL ID Act Modification for Freely Associated  States Act made FAS citizens eligible for full-term REAL ID–compliant  identification. Since then, compact migrants have been eligible for full- term REAL ID–compliant identification, valid for the maximum number of  years for any license or identification as set by individual U.S. states and  territories, according to DHS officials.

Compact Migrant Challenges Related to REAL ID–Compliant Identification

In several areas that we visited, compact migrant communities described  challenges they had experienced in obtaining or renewing their REAL ID– compliant identification. Some compact migrants spoke of difficulty due  to the requirement to present a visa or an EAD as evidence of identity. In  one location, FAS community members said that other members of the  community had lost employment on a military base because they were  unable to obtain REAL ID–compliant identification. (We heard many of  these observations before September 2019, when DHS modified the  policy that required applicants for REAL ID–compliant identification to  present a visa or EAD.)

Some compact migrants reported being unable to obtain REAL ID– compliant identification for other reasons. number on their current foreign passports. When an FAS citizen’s  passport expires and he or she renews it while in the United States,  the new passport has a different number than the former passport  number displayed on the FAS citizen’s Form I-94.

Appendix XI: Comments from the Government of Hawaii

Appendix XII: Comments from the Government of Guam

1.  Section 104(e)(9)(A) of the amended compacts’ enabling legislation  authorized the President of the United States, at the request of the  Governor of Guam or the Governor of the Commonwealth of the  Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI), to reduce, release, or waive all or  part of any amounts owed by the Guam or CNMI government (or  either government’s autonomous agencies or instrumentalities),  respectively, to any department, agency, independent agency, office,  or instrumentality of the United States. According to section  104(e)(9)(B)(iv), that authority expired on February 28, 2005.  2.  The Census Bureau data that we report reflect a definition of  “compact migrants” that includes citizens of the Federated States of  Micronesia (Micronesia), Republic of the Marshall Islands (Marshall  Islands), and Republic of Palau (Palau) who entered the United States  after 1986 (from Micronesia and the Marshall Islands) or 1994 (from  Palau) and their U.S.-born children (biological, adopted, and step-)  and grandchildren younger than 18 years.

Appendix XIII: Comments from the Government of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands

Appendix XIV: Comments from the Government of Arkansas

1.  The Arkansas Department of Education’s data estimating the number  of compact migrant students at 4,175 is based on students’ ethnicity  (Hawaiian and Pacific Islander) in the 2018-2019 school year. As a  result, Arkansas’s estimate may include students who are not  Marshallese. In addition, Arkansas’s estimate may include second- generation U.S. citizens, including Marshallese children born in the  United States to Marshallese parents who were also born in the  United States. The American Community Survey data that we report  reflect a definition of “compact migrants” that includes only citizens of  the Federated States of Micronesia (Micronesia), Republic of the  Marshall Islands (Marshall Islands), and Republic of Palau (Palau)  who entered the United States after 1986 (from Micronesia and the  Marshall Islands) or 1994 (from Palau) and their U.S.-born children  (biological, adopted, and step-) and grandchildren younger than 18  years. The 5,895 compact migrants that the Census Bureau estimated  resided in Arkansas during the period 2013 to 2017 (a different time  period from that of the data cited by the government of Arkansas)  includes only adults and children who met those criteria. We believe  that the Census Bureau data are sufficiently reliable for our purposes  of estimating the number of compact migrants in U.S. areas.  However, our report includes a discussion of stakeholder concerns  that the compact migrant population in Arkansas may be  undercounted.  2.  The population estimate cited in the published study from Arkansas is  based in part on a 2013 statement by a Marshallese consulate official.  The Arkansas Department of Education estimated there were 4,175  Hawaiian and Pacific Islander students in Arkansas schools in the  2018-2019 school year.  3.  Costs related to compact migration in U.S. areas not considered  affected jurisdictions are outside the scope of our review.  4.  We updated our report to reflect the data that the government of  Arkansas cites for the period 1997 to 2019.

Appendix XV: Comments from the Government of Oregon

1.  We have previously reported on defense issues in the Federated  States of Micronesia and the Republic of the Marshall Islands  (Marshall Islands). For more information about the United States’ right  to use part of the Kwajalein Atoll in the Marshall Islands for missile  tests and space tracking operations, see GAO, Foreign Relations:  Kwajalein Atoll Is the Key U.S. Defense Interest in Two Micronesian  Nations, GAO-02-119 (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 22, 2002). For more  information about the Marshall Islands’ Nuclear Claims Trust Fund,  see GAO, Marshall Islands: Status of the Nuclear Claims Trust Fund,  GAO/NSIAD-92-229 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 25, 1992).  2.  Our report provides some information about contributions by compact  migrants, including qualitative statements about their budgetary,  workforce, and community contributions as well as high-level data on  their average per-capita income (see app. IV). We have added the  government of Oregon’s statements about the contributions of  compact migrants to our report.  3.  As our report notes, the affected jurisdictions are defined in the  amended compacts’ implementing legislation, which also establishes  funding for the associated compact impact grants for those  jurisdictions.  4.  We made revisions in our report to help direct readers to  stakeholders’ suggestions for improving experiences or outcomes of  compact migration, presented in appendix VII.

Appendix XVI: Comments from the Government of Washington

1.  Our report incorporates the results of our interviews with members of  compact migrant communities, including their reasons for migrating to  U.S. areas, workforce challenges and other challenges they face, and  their contributions to U.S. communities. Our report also includes these  and other stakeholders’ suggestions for improving experiences or  outcomes of compact migration (see app. VII).  2.  We have previously reported on defense issues in the Federated  States of Micronesia and the Republic of the Marshall Islands  (Marshall Islands). For more information about the United States’ right  to use part of the Kwajalein Atoll in the Marshall Islands for missile  tests and space tracking operations, see GAO, Foreign Relations:  Kwajalein Atoll Is the Key U.S. Defense Interest in Two Micronesian  Nations, GAO-02-119 (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 22, 2002). For more  information about the Marshall Islands’ Nuclear Claims Trust Fund,  see GAO, Marshall Islands: Status of the Nuclear Claims Trust Fund,  GAO/NSIAD-92-229 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 25, 1992).

Appendix XVII: Comments from the Government of the Federated States of Micronesia

(from Micronesia and the Marshall Islands) or 1994 (from Palau) and  their U.S.-born children (biological, adopted, and step-) and  grandchildren younger than 18 years. Given this definition, any  individual older than 18 years who was not born in an FAS would not  be counted as a compact migrant in the Census Bureau enumerations  or the American Community Survey data in this report.  8.  Table 10 in appendix II of our report includes estimates of the number  of compact migrants in states with fewer than 1,000 estimated  compact migrants, except when the data were suppressed by the  Census Bureau or the number was unreportable because the margin  of error exceeded the estimate.  9.  Our report notes that some FAS citizens move to U.S. areas to join  the military and that the FASs have a high rate of U.S. military service,  according to FAS officials and Department of State documentation.  10. The amended compacts’ implementing legislation permitted the  affected jurisdictions (Hawaii, Guam, the Commonwealth of the  Northern Mariana Islands, and American Samoa) to submit compact  impact reports to the Secretary of the Interior. The definition of  “affected jurisdictions” in the legislation did not include any mainland  states.  11. Our report notes that compact migrants work in professional  industries, including jobs in government and education.  12. We updated our report to include information about the locations of  COFA Alliance National Network chapters in states other than  Oregon.

Appendix XVIII: Comments from the Government of the Republic of the Marshall Islands

1.  Our report describes policies allowing compact migrants to access in- state tuition at colleges and universities in some U.S. areas but does  not include a comprehensive description of such policies in all U.S.  areas.  2.  Our report describes this and other challenges related to Form I-94  and includes freely associated state consular officials’  recommendations to their citizens experiencing this challenge (see  app. VII).

Appendix XIX: Comments from the Government of the Republic of Palau

Pacific in the 2005 legislation was an error, it had no impact on FAS  citizens’ eligibility for limited-term REAL ID–compliant identification.

Appendix XX: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgements

David Gootnick, (202) 512-3149 or gootnickd@gao.gov  In addition to the contact named above, Emil Friberg (Assistant Director),  Caitlin Mitchell (Analyst-in-Charge), Topher Hoffmann, Andrew Kurtzman,  Reid Lowe, Moon Parks, and Nicole Willems made key contributions to  this report. Kathryn Bernet, Justin Fisher, Rebecca Gambler, Christopher  Keblitis, Ty Mitchell, Mary Moutsos, and Michael Simon provided  technical assistance.

For 3 decades, citizens of Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, and Palau have been able to live and work in the U.S. indefinitely without a visa through special agreements called compacts. The number of people who migrate to the U.S. under the auspices of these compacts has grown by about 70% in the last decade, particularly on the mainland.

U.S. areas reported rising costs of public education and health care programs and services for these migrants. Though these populations generally aren’t eligible for federal programs such as Medicaid, some states have found ways to use federal funding to help cover their health insurance premiums.