Unaccompanied Children: Agency Efforts to Identify and Reunify Children Separated from Parents at the Border

On April 6, 2018, the Attorney General issued a memorandum on criminal prosecutions of immigration offenses. According to HHS officials, this resulted in a considerable increase in the number of minor children whom DHS separated from their parents after attempting to cross the U.S. border illegally. On June 20, 2018, the President issued an executive order directing that alien families generally be detained together, and on June 26, 2018, a federal judge ordered the government to reunify separated families. DHS is responsible for the apprehension and transfer of UAC to HHS. HHS is responsible for coordinating UAC placement and care.

This testimony discusses DHS and HHS (1) planning efforts related to the Attorney General's April 2018 memo, (2) systems for indicating children were separated from parents, and (3) actions to reunify families in response to the June 2018 court order. It is based on a report GAO issued in October 2018. This testimony also includes updated data reported by the government on the number children separated from their parents subject to the court's reunification order and the number of those children in ORR custody as of December 11, 2018.

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) officials GAO interviewed said the agencies did not plan for the potential increase in the number of children separated from their parent or legal guardian as a result of the Attorney General's April 2018 “zero tolerance” memo because they were unaware of the memo in advance of its public release. The memo directed Department of Justice prosecutors to accept for criminal prosecution all referrals from DHS of offenses related to improper entry into the United States, to the extent practicable. As a result, parents were placed in criminal detention, and their children were placed in the custody of HHS's Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR). DHS and ORR treated separated children as unaccompanied alien children (UAC)—those under 18 years old with no lawful immigration status and no parent or legal guardian in the United States available to provide care and physical custody.

Prior to April 2018, DHS and HHS did not have a consistent way to indicate in their data systems children and parents separated at the border. In April and July 2018, U.S. Customs and Border Protection's Border Patrol and ORR updated their data systems to allow them to indicate whether a child was separated. However, it is too soon to know the extent to which these changes, if fully implemented, will consistently indicate when children have been separated from their parents, or will help reunify families, if appropriate.

In response to a June 26, 2018 court order to quickly reunify children separated from their parents, HHS determined how many children in its care were subject to the order and developed procedures for reunifying these families. As of September 2018, the government identified 2,654 children in ORR custody who potentially met reunification criteria, which does not include separated children released to sponsors prior to the June 2018 court order. On July 10, 2018, the court approved reunification procedures for the parents covered by the June 2018 court order. This July 10, 2018 order noted that ORR's standard procedures used to release UAC from its care to sponsors were not meant to apply in this circumstance, in which parents and children who were apprehended together were separated by government officials. Since GAO's October 2018 report, the government identified additional children separated from parents subject to the court's reunification order and released additional children from its custody (see figure).

GAO recommended in 2015 that DHS and HHS improve their process for transferring UAC from DHS to HHS custody. DHS and HHS concurred and have taken action, but have not fully implemented the recommendation.

Thank you for the opportunity to discuss the efforts of the Department of  Homeland Security (DHS) and Department of Health and Human  Services (HHS) to plan for and respond to family separations that  occurred during the spring of 2018 at the southwest border. On April 6,  2018, the Attorney General issued a memorandum on criminal  prosecutions of immigration offenses, which officials said resulted in a  considerable increase in the number of minor children whom DHS  separated from their parents or legal guardians after attempting to cross  the U.S. border illegally. On June 20, 2018, the President issued an  executive order directing that alien families generally be detained  together, and on June 26, 2018, a federal judge ordered the government  to reunify certain separated families.

My statement today will focus on (1) DHS and HHS planning efforts  related to the Attorney General’s April 2018 memo, (2) DHS and HHS  systems for indicating children were separated from parents, and (3) DHS  and HHS actions to reunify families in response to the June 2018 court  order. My statement is based on the findings from our October 2018  report, which provides a detailed description of our methodology. To  obtain updated data on the number of children affected by the federal  court order to reunify families, we reviewed the December 12, 2018 joint  status update. The work upon which this statement is based was  conducted 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.

Family Separations at the Southwest Border

According to DHS and HHS officials, DHS has historically separated a  number of children from accompanying adults at the border and  transferred them to HHS custody, but these separations occurred only in  certain circumstances. For example, DHS might separate families if the  parental relationship could not be confirmed, if there was reason to  believe the adult was participating in human trafficking or otherwise a  threat to the safety of the child, or if the child crossed the border with  other family members such as grandparents without proof of legal  guardianship. HHS has traditionally treated these children as  unaccompanied alien children (UAC)—children who (1) have no lawful  immigration status in the United States, (2) have not attained 18 years of  age, and (3) have no parent or legal guardian in the United States or no  parent or legal guardian in the United States available to provide care and  physical custody.

The Attorney General’s April 2018 memorandum, also referred to as the  “zero tolerance” policy, directed Department of Justice (DOJ) prosecutors  to accept all referrals of all improper entry offenses from DHS for criminal  prosecution, to the extent practicable. According to DHS officials, in  implementing the April 2018 memo, DHS’s U.S. Customs and Border  Protection (CBP) began referring a greater number of individuals  apprehended at the border to DOJ for criminal prosecution, including  parents who were apprehended with children. In these cases, referred  parents were placed into U.S. Marshals Service custody and separated  from their children because minors cannot remain with a parent who is  arrested on criminal charges and detained by U.S. Marshals Service. In  cases where parents were referred to DOJ for criminal proceedings and  separated from their children, DHS and HHS officials stated they treated  those children as UAC. In such cases, DHS transferred these children to  the custody of HHS’s Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) and ORR  placed them in one of their shelter facilities, as is the standard procedure  for UAC.

The President’s executive order issued on June 20, 2018, directed,  among other things, that the Secretary of Homeland Security maintain  custody of alien families during any criminal improper entry or immigration  proceedings involving their family members, to the extent possible. This  order stated that the policy of the administration is to maintain family  unity, including by detaining alien families together where appropriate. In  addition, on June 26, 2018, a federal judge ruled in the Ms. L. v. ICE case  that certain separated parents must be reunited with their minor children  (referred to in this testimony statement as the “June 2018 court order”).  In this case, the American Civil Liberties Union filed a federal lawsuit on  behalf of certain parents (referred to as class members) who had been  separated from their children. As of September, 10, 2018, the  government had identified 2,654 children of potential class members in  the Ms. L. v. ICE case, which we discuss in greater detail later in this  statement. As of January 31, 2019, this litigation was ongoing.

Care and Custody of Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC)

Under the Homeland Security Act of 2002, responsibility for the  apprehension, temporary detention, transfer, and repatriation of UAC is  delegated to DHS, and responsibility for coordinating and implementing  the placement and care of UAC is delegated to HHS’s ORR. CBP’s U.S.  Border Patrol (Border Patrol) and Office of Field Operations (OFO), as  well as DHS’s ICE, apprehend, process, temporarily detain, and care for  UAC who enter the United States with no lawful immigration status.  ICE’s Office of Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) is generally  responsible for transferring UAC, as appropriate, to ORR, or repatriating  them to their countries of nationality or last habitual residence. Under the  William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of  2008 (TVPRA), UAC in the custody of any federal department or agency,  including DHS, must be transferred to ORR within 72 hours after  determining that they are UAC, except in exceptional circumstances. In  addition, the 1997 Flores v. Reno Settlement Agreement (Flores  Agreement) sets standards of care for UAC while in DHS or ORR  custody, including, among other things, providing drinking water, food,  and proper physical care and shelter for children.

In 2015 and 2016, we reported on DHS’s and HHS’s care and custody of  UAC, including the standard procedures that DHS follows to transfer UAC  to ORR. ORR’s UAC policy guide states that the agency requests  certain information from DHS when DHS refers children to ORR,  including, for example, how DHS determined the child was  unaccompanied. Depending on which DHS component or office is  referring the child to ORR, DHS may provide information on the child in  an automated manner directly into ORR’s UAC Portal—the official system  of record for children in ORR’s care—or via email.

ORR has cooperative agreements with residential care providers to  house and care for UAC while they are in ORR custody. The aim is to  provide housing and care in the least restrictive environment  commensurate with the children’s safety and emotional and physical  needs. In addition, these care providers are responsible for identifying  and assessing the suitability of potential sponsors—generally a parent or  other relative in the country—who can care for the child after the child  leaves ORR custody. Release to a sponsor does not grant UAC legal  immigration status. Children are scheduled for removal proceedings in  immigration courts to determine whether they will be ordered removed  from the United States or granted immigration relief.

Once at the shelter, shelter staff typically conduct an intake assessment  of the child within 24 hours, and then are to provide services such as  health care and education. According to ORR’s UAC policy guide, shelter  staff are responsible for meeting with the child to begin identifying  potential sponsors, which can include parents. To assess the suitability of  potential sponsors, including parents, ORR care providers collect  information from potential sponsors to establish and identify their  relationship to the child. For example, the screening conducted of  potential sponsors includes various background checks and in June 2018,  ORR implemented increased background check requirements that were  outlined in an April 2018 memorandum of agreement with DHS. These  changes required ORR staff to collect fingerprints from all potential  sponsors, including parents, and all adults in the potential sponsor’s  household and transmit the fingerprints to ICE to perform criminal and  immigration status checks on ORR’s behalf. ICE was to submit the results  to ORR, and ORR used this information, along with information provided  by, and interviews with, the potential sponsors, to assess their  suitability. However, in December 2018, ORR revised its background  check policy to limit criminal and immigration status checks conducted by  ICE to the potential sponsor, unless concerns about other adult  household members are raised via a public records check, there is a  documented risk to the safety of the child, the child is particularly  vulnerable, or the case is referred for a home study.

HHS and DHS Planning for Family Separations

According to HHS and DHS officials we interviewed, the departments did  not take specific steps in advance of the April 2018 memo to plan for  family separations or a potential increase in the number of children who  would be referred to ORR because they did not have advance notice of  the memo. Specifically, ORR, CBP, and ICE officials we interviewed  stated that they became aware of the April 2018 memo when it was  announced publicly.

Though they did not receive advance notice of the April 2018 memo,  ORR officials stated that they were aware that increased separations of  parents and children were occurring prior to the April memo. According to  ORR officials, the percentage of children referred to ORR who were  known to have been separated from their parents rose by more than  tenfold from November 2016 to August 2017 (0.3 to 3.6 percent). In  addition, the ORR shelter and field staff we interviewed at four ORR  facilities in Arizona and Texas told us they started noticing an increase in  the number of children separated from their parents in late 2017 and early  2018, prior to the April 2018 memo. The DHS officials we interviewed  stated that, in some locations across the southwest border, there was an  increase in the number of aliens CBP referred to DOJ for prosecution of  immigration-related offenses after an Attorney General memo issued in  April 2017. This memo prioritized enforcement of a number of criminal  immigration-related offenses, including misdemeanor improper entry. In  addition, CBP officials stated that there may have been an increase in  children separated from non-parent relatives or other adults fraudulently  posing as the child’s parents.

According to ORR officials, in November 2017, ORR officials asked DHS  officials to provide information about the increase in separated children. In  response, DHS officials stated that DHS did not have an official policy to  separate families, according to ORR officials. A few months prior to the  April 2018 memo, ORR officials said they saw a continued increase in  separated children in their care. ORR officials noted that they considered  planning for continued increases in separated children, but HHS  leadership advised ORR not to engage in such planning since DHS  officials told them that DHS did not have an official policy of separating  families.

From July to November 2017, the Border Patrol sector in El Paso, Texas  conducted an initiative to address an increase in apprehensions of  families that sector officials had noted in early fiscal year 2017.   Specifically, Border Patrol officials in the sector reached an agreement  with the District of New Mexico U.S. Attorney’s Office to refer more  individuals who had been apprehended, including parents who arrived  with minor children, for criminal prosecution. Prior to this initiative, the  U.S. Attorney’s Office in this district had placed limits on the number of  referrals it would accept from Border Patrol for prosecution of immigration  offenses. According to Border Patrol officials, under this initiative, the  U.S. Attorney’s Office agreed to accept all referrals from Border Patrol in  the El Paso sector for individuals with violations of 8 U.S.C. § 1325  (improper entry by alien) and § 1326 (reentry of removed aliens),  consistent with the Attorney General’s 2017 memo directing federal  prosecutors to prioritize such prosecutions. For those parents placed  into criminal custody, Border Patrol referred their children to ORR’s care  as UAC. According to a Border Patrol report on the initiative, the El Paso  sector processed approximately 1,800 individuals in families and 281  individuals in families were separated under this initiative. Border Patrol  headquarters directed the sector to end this initiative in November 2017,  and Border Patrol officials stated that there were no other similar local  initiatives that occurred prior to the Attorney General’s 2018 memo.

DHS and HHS Systems for Indicating When Children Were Separated from Parents

When the April 2018 memo was released, there was no single database  with easily extractable, reliable information on family separations. DHS  and HHS subsequently updated their data systems in the spring and  summer of 2018, but it is too soon to know the extent to which these  changes, if fully implemented, will consistently indicate when children  have been separated from the parents or will help reunify families, if  appropriate. Specifically, prior to April 2018, CBP’s and ORR’s data  systems did not include a designated field to indicate that a child was  unaccompanied as a result of being separated from his or her parent, and  ORR officials stated that such information was not always provided when  children were transferred from DHS to HHS custody. According to agency  officials, between April and August 2018, the agencies made changes to  their data systems to help notate in their records when children are  separated from parents.

Regarding DHS, CBP’s Border Patrol and OFO made changes to their  data systems to allow them to better indicate cases in which children  were separated from their parents; however, ORR officials told us in  September 2018, that they had been unaware that DHS had made these  systems changes.

According to Border Patrol officials, Border Patrol modified its system  on April 19, 2018, to include yes/no check boxes to allow agents to  indicate that a child was separated from their parent(s). However,  Border Patrol officials told us that information on whether a child had  been separated is not automatically included in the referral form sent  to ORR. Rather, agents may indicate a separation in the referral notes  sent electronically to ORR, but they are not required to do so,  according to Border Patrol officials. While the changes to the system  may make it easier for Border Patrol to identify children separated  from their parents, ORR officials stated ORR may not receive  information through this mechanism to help it identify or track  separated children. Prior to this system modification, Border Patrol  agents typically categorized a separated child as an unaccompanied  child in its system and did not include information to indicate the child  had been separated from a parent.

CBP’s OFO, which encounters families presenting themselves at  ports of entry, also modified its data system and issued guidance to  its officers on June 29, 2018, to track children separated from their  parents. OFO officials have access to the UAC Portal but typically  email this information to ORR as part of the referral request.  According to OFO officials, prior to that time, OFO designated children  separated from their parents as unaccompanied.

ORR updated the UAC Portal to include a check box for indicating that a  child was separated from his or her parents. According to ORR officials,  ORR made these changes on July 6, 2018, after the June 20 executive  order and June 2018 court order to reunify families. According to ORR  officials, prior to July 6, 2018, the UAC Portal did not have a systematic  way to indicate whether a child was designated as unaccompanied as a  result of being separated from a parent at the border. The updates allow  those Border Patrol agents with direct access to the UAC Portal to check  this box, and Border Patrol issued guidance on July 5, 2018, directing its  agents to use the new indicator for separated children in the UAC Portal  and provide the parent’s alien number in the UAC Portal when making  referrals to ORR as of July 6, 2018. However, ORR officials also said  that DHS components with access to the UAC Portal are not yet utilizing  the new check box consistently.

Staff at three of the four shelters we visited in Arizona and Texas in July  and August of 2018 said that in most, but not all cases during the spring  of 2018, DHS indicated in the custody transfer information that a child had  been separated. Staff at one shelter estimated that for approximately 5  percent of the separated children in its care there was no information from  DHS indicating parental separation. In these cases, shelter staff said they  learned about the separation from the child during the shelter’s intake  assessment. Staff at the same shelter, which cares for children ages 0 to  4, noted that intake assessments for younger children are different from  intake for older children, as younger children are unable to provide  detailed information on such issues as parental separation.

While the updates that OFO and ORR have made to their data systems  are a positive step, they do not fully address the broader coordination  issues we identified in our previous work. Specifically, we identified  weaknesses in DHS and HHS’s process for the referral of UAC. In 2015,  we reported that the interagency process to refer and transfer UAC from  DHS to HHS was inefficient and vulnerable to errors because it relied on  emails and manual data entry, and documented standard procedures,  including defined roles and responsibilities, did not exist. To increase  the efficiency and improve the accuracy of the interagency UAC referral  and placement process, we recommended that the Secretaries of DHS  and HHS jointly develop and implement a documented interagency  process with clearly defined roles and responsibilities, as well as  procedures to disseminate placement decisions, for all agencies involved  in the referral and placement of UAC in HHS shelters. In response, DHS  officials told us DHS delivered a Joint Concept of Operations between  DHS and HHS to Congress on July 31, 2018, which provides field  guidance on interagency policies, procedures, and guidelines related to  the processing of UAC transferred from DHS to HHS. DHS submitted the  Joint Concept of Operations to us on September 26, 2018, in response to  our recommendation. We are reviewing the extent to which the Joint  Concept of Operations includes a documented interagency process with  clearly defined roles and responsibilities, as well as procedures to  disseminate placement decisions, for all agencies involved in the referral  and placement of unaccompanied children, including those separated  from parents at the border, in HHS shelters. Moreover, to fully address  our recommendation, DHS and HHS should implement such interagency  processes.

DHS and HHS Actions to Reunify Families in Response to the June 2018 Court Order

DHS and HHS took various actions in response to the June 26, 2018,  court order to identify and reunify children separated from their parents.  The June 2018 court order required the government to reunite class  member parents with their children under 5 years of age within 14 days of  the order, and for children age 5 and over, within 30 days of the order.  HHS officials told us that there were no specific procedures to reunite  children with parents from whom they were separated at the border prior  to the June 2018 court order. Rather, the agency used its standard  procedures, developed to comply with the William Wilberforce Trafficking  Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 (TVPRA), to consider  potential sponsors for unaccompanied children in their custody; if a parent  was available to become a sponsor, reunification with that parent was a  possible outcome.

DHS and HHS Efforts to Identify Potential Class Members. To create  the list of potential class members (that is, those parents of a separated  child covered under the lawsuit) eligible for reunification per the June  2018 court order, DHS and HHS officials told us that they generated the  list based on children who were in DHS or HHS custody on that date. As  a result, DHS and HHS officials told us that a parent of a separated child  would only be a class member if his or her child was detained in DHS or  HHS custody on June 26, 2018. After developing the class list, DHS and  HHS officials told us that they next determined whether class members  were eligible for reunification, as a class member could be determined  ineligible for reunification if it was determined that the parent was unfit or  presented a danger to the child.

Parents of children who were separated at the border but whose children  were released by ORR to sponsors prior to the June 2018 court order  were not considered class members, and according to HHS officials, the  department was not obligated to reunite them with the parent or parents  from whom they were separated. Further, HHS officials told us that they  do not know how many such children separated from parents at the  border were released to sponsors prior to the order and that the court  order does not require the department to know this information.

Because there was no single database with information on family  separations, HHS officials reported using three methods to determine  which children in ORR’s custody as of June 26, 2018, had been  separated from parents at the border:  1.  Data Reviewed by an Interagency Data Team. An interagency team  of data scientists and analysts—led by HHS’s Office of the Assistant  Secretary for Preparedness and Response with participation from  CBP, ICE, and ORR—used data and information provided by DHS  and HHS to identify the locations of separated children and parents,  according to HHS officials.  2.  Case File Review. HHS reported that more than 100 HHS staff  reviewed about 12,000 electronic case files of all children in its care  as of June 26, 2018 for indications of separation in specific sections of  each child’s case file, such as the phrases “zero tolerance,”  “separated from ,” and “family  separation.”  3.  Review of Information Provided by Shelters. According to HHS  officials, shelter staff were asked to provide lists of children in their  care who were known to be separated from parents based on the  shelter’s records.

On the basis of its reviews, as of September 10, 2018, the government  had identified 2,654 children of potential class members in the Ms. L. v.  ICE case. Of the 2,654 children, 103 were age 0 to 4 and 2,551 were  age 5 to 17. As previously discussed, the number of children of potential  class members does not include those who were separated from parents  but released to sponsors prior to the June 2018 court order or the more than 500 children who were reunified with parents by CBP in late June  2018, because these children were never transferred to ORR custody.

As of September 10, 2018, 2,217 of the 2,654 identified children had  been released from ORR custody, according to a joint status report filed  in the Ms. L. v. ICE case. About 90 percent of the released children  were reunited with the parent from whom they were separated and the  remaining children were released under other circumstances. Children  released under other circumstances could include those released to  another sponsor such as a parent already in the United States, another  relative, or an unrelated adult, or children who turned 18. Staff at one  ORR facility we visited told us they planned to release some children  under these circumstances. As of December 11, 2018, the government  had identified additional possible separated children of potential class  members for a total of 2,816. It had released 2,657 and 159 remained in  ORR custody. However, the government has also reported that 79 of  the children it initially identified as separated had not been separated from  a parent. Excluding those 79 children from the 2,816 total would bring  the total number of children separated to 2,737.

Plan for Reunifying Children with Class Member Parents Within and  Outside ICE’s Custody. The process used to reunify separated children  with their class member parents in the Ms. L. v. ICE case evolved over  time based on multiple court hearings and orders, according to HHS  officials. After the June 2018 court order, HHS officials said the agency  planned to reunify children using a process similar to their standard  procedures for placing unaccompanied children with sponsors. However,  according to agency officials, the agency realized that it would be difficult  to meet the court’s reunification deadlines using its standard procedures  and began developing a process for court approval that would expedite  reunification for class members. As a result, from June 26, 2018 to July  10, 2018, the reunification process was refined and evolved iteratively  based on court status conferences, according to HHS officials. ORR field  and shelter staff we interviewed noted the impact of the continually  changing reunification process; for example, staff at one shelter told us  there were times when they would be following one process in the  morning but a different one in the afternoon.

On July 10, 2018, the court approved reunification procedures for the  class members covered by the June 2018 court order. In the July 10,  2018 order that outlined these procedures, the court noted that the  standard procedures developed by ORR pursuant to the TVPRA were  meant to address “a different situation, namely, what to do with alien  children who were apprehended without their parents at the border or  otherwise” and that the agency’s standard procedures were not meant to  apply to the situation presented in the Ms. L. v. ICE case, which involves  parents and children who were apprehended together and then separated  by government officials. The reunification procedures approved in the  Ms. L. v. ICE case apply only to reunification of class members with their  children and included determining (1) parentage and (2) whether the  parent is fit to take care of the child or presents any danger to the child.  Specifically:  1.  Determining Parentage. Before July 10, 2018, to determine  parentage for children ages 0 to 4, HHS officials said they initially  used DNA swab testing instead of requiring documentation, such as  birth certificates, stating that DNA swab testing was a prompt and  efficient method for determining biological parentage in a significant  number of cases. On July 10, 2018, the court approved the use of  DNA testing “only when necessary to verify a legitimate, good-faith  concern about parentage or to meet a reunification deadline.” HHS  officials told us that at that point, to determine parentage, ORR relied  on the determinations made by DHS when the family was separated  and information ORR shelter staff had already collected through  assessments of the children in their care. Unless there were specific  doubts about the relationship, ORR did not collect additional  information to confirm parentage, according to HHS officials.  2.  Determining Fitness and Danger. To reunify class members, HHS  also followed the procedures approved by the court on July 10, 2018  for determining whether a parent is fit and whether a parent presents  a danger to the child. HHS used the fingerprints and criminal  background check of the parent conducted by DHS when the  individual was first taken into DHS custody rather than requiring the  parent and other adults living in the household to submit fingerprints  to ORR, as potential sponsors were typically required to do for  unaccompanied children. According to HHS officials, ORR  personnel also reviewed each child’s case file for any indication of a  safety concern, such as allegations of abuse by the child. HHS did not  require fingerprints of other adults living in the household where the  parent and child will live. HHS also did not require parents to complete  an ORR family reunification application as potential sponsors are  typically required to do for unaccompanied children.

The specific procedures for physical reunification varied depending on  whether the parents were inside or outside of ICE custody. DHS and HHS  took steps to coordinate their efforts to reunify children with parents who  were in ICE custody, but experienced challenges. Generally, for parents  in ICE custody, DHS transported parents to a detention facility close to  their child and HHS transported the child to the same facility. At the  facility HHS transferred custody of the child to ICE for final reunification.  HHS officials said that in some instances children had to wait for parents  for unreasonably long amounts of time and parents were transported to  the wrong facilities. In one case, staff at one shelter told us that they had  to stay two nights in a hotel with the child before reunification could occur.

According to HHS officials, for families in which the parent was released  into the interior of the United States, the reunification process involves  ORR officials and shelter staff attempting to establish contact with the  parent and determining whether the parent has “red flags” for parentage  or child safety. These determinations are based on DHS-provided  criminal background check summary information and case review of the  child’s UAC Portal records. In cases where no red flags are found, HHS  transports the child to the parent or the parent picks the child up at the  ORR shelter. For more information on DHS and HHS reunification  procedures for class member parents inside and outside ICE custody,  see GAO-19-163.

Chair DeGette, Ranking Member Guthrie, and Members of the  Subcommittee, this concludes our prepared remarks. We would be happy  to answer any questions that you may have.

For further information regarding this testimony, please contact Kathryn  A. Larin at (202) 512-7215 or larink@gao.gov or Rebecca Gambler at  (202) 512-8777 or gamblerr@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of  Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page  of this statement.

Individuals who made key contributions to this testimony include Kathryn  Bernet (Assistant Director), Elizabeth Morrison (Assistant Director), David  Barish (Analyst-in-Charge), Andrea Dawson, Jason Palmer, and Leslie  Sarapu. In addition, key support was provided by Susan Aschoff, James  Bennett, Sarah Cornetto, Michael Kniss, Sheila R. McCoy, Jean  McSween, Jan Montgomery, Heidi Nielson, and Almeta Spencer.

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the  United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety  without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain  copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be  necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately.

The Attorney General's April 2018 "zero tolerance" memo on prosecuting immigration-related offenses prompted federal officials to increase the rate of family separations, placing considerably more children in Office of Refugee Resettlement custody. In June, a federal judge ordered reunifications.

In October 2018, we reported on what the Departments of Homeland Security and Health and Human Services were doing about these events. This testimony updates that report and provides new data from the government on the number of children subject to the reunification order and the number of children in custody as of December 11, 2018.


Aviation Maintenance: Additional Coordination and Data Could Advance FAA Efforts to Promote a Robust, Diverse Workforce

FAA requires that only mechanics who are “certificated” by the FAA approve aircraft for return to service. The required training to become a certificated mechanic can take between 1 and 3 years. FAA also oversees the certification of repairmen who work on aircraft parts. Some stakeholders have expressed concern that retirements and attrition could adversely affect the capacity of this workforce to meet the growing demand for air travel, and that mechanic curriculum is outdated.

The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 included provisions for GAO to examine the aviation workforce. This report examines (1) what available federal data reveal about the FAA-certificated aviation maintenance workforce; (2) how selected government agencies, educational institutions, and businesses provide support and coordinate to develop the aviation maintenance workforce; and (3) the progress FAA has made in updating its curriculum and testing standards for mechanics. GAO analyzed FAA data on certificate holders as of December 2018; reviewed BLS employment data for 2013 through 2018; reviewed relevant federal laws and regulations; and interviewed selected federal agency, industry, and AMT School officials.

Federal data provide an incomplete picture of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)-certificated aviation maintenance workforce. A sufficient supply of certificated workers is critical for safety and to meet the growing demand for air travel. However, supply and demand data for certificated workers are limited. FAA maintains data on the number of individuals newly certificated each year (see figure), but less is known about how many certificated individuals exit the aviation industry each year and the extent of growing demand. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) data provide some information on pay and demand for aviation maintenance workers more broadly, but do not differentiate between FAA-certificated and non-certificated workers due to data collection challenges. Demographic data may also be useful for workforce analysis and planning. FAA data provide some demographic information on certificated mechanics and repairmen, such as age and sex, but the agency lacks data on race and ethnicity. According to GAO analysis of FAA data, over half of the roughly 330,000 mechanics and repairmen FAA had certificated as of December 2018 were between 50 and 70 years old and 97 percent were men.

Government agencies, educational institutions, and businesses coordinate to some extent in support of this workforce, but FAA lacks certain information—including information maintained by other agencies that administer related programs—that could advance its workforce development efforts. One of FAA's strategic objectives includes promoting the development of a robust, skilled aviation workforce, and the agency established a committee, in part, to explore ways to diversify this workforce; however, FAA is not currently positioned to understand whether its efforts are optimally targeted or effective. Without routinely analyzing its own data or leveraging others' data, FAA may not have certain information it needs to track or ensure progress toward its workforce development goals.

FAA has acknowledged that curriculum requirements for Aviation Maintenance Technician (AMT) Schools and mechanic testing standards are outdated. Efforts to revise the curriculum requirements for AMT Schools are ongoing and FAA officials told GAO that a final rule will be published some time toward the end of 2020. FAA officials indicated that the revised mechanic testing standards would likely be finalized after.

GAO recommends that FAA use its existing data and coordinate with other federal agencies to identify and gather information to measure progress and target resources toward its goal of promoting a robust, qualified, and diverse aviation maintenance workforce. FAA agreed with the recommendation.

Each year, hundreds of millions of passengers rely on airlines to get them  safely to their destination. Public confidence in safety is critical to the  aviation industry, and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requires  repaired aircraft be approved for return to service only by mechanics who  are “certificated” by the FAA. A sufficient supply of qualified aviation  maintenance workers, including FAA-certificated mechanics and  repairmen, is necessary for repairing aircraft and maintaining a safe and  robust aviation system. Changes in technology in the aviation industry  are ongoing and expected to continue at a rapid pace, which could affect  the training of these workers. In addition, FAA and the aviation industry  anticipate that the demand for air travel will grow in coming years. Federal  and aviation industry stakeholders have expressed concern over the  capacity of the aviation maintenance workforce to meet projected needs  due to retirements, attrition, fleet growth, and the growing demand for air  travel.

The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 included a provision for us to  examine different aspects of the aviation maintenance workforce. This  report examines (1) what available federal data reveal about the FAA- certificated aviation maintenance workforce, (2) how selected government  agencies, educational institutions, and businesses provide support and  coordinate to develop the aviation maintenance workforce, and (3) the  progress FAA has made in updating its curriculum, certification, and  testing standards for mechanics.

To examine the characteristics of FAA-certificated mechanics and  repairmen, we analyzed cumulative FAA data as of December 2018 for  demographic characteristics such as age and sex. To examine the  employment characteristics of aviation maintenance workers—such as  wages and unemployment—we analyzed Bureau of Labor Statistics  (BLS) Current Population Survey data for selected labor market indicators  from 2013 through 2018, and we reviewed all 50 states’ most recent  Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act plans. See appendix I for our  labor market indicator analysis.

To describe stakeholder support and assess stakeholder coordination on  efforts to develop this workforce, we interviewed agency officials from  FAA and the Departments of Labor (DOL), Education (Education),  Defense (DOD), and Veterans Affairs (VA) about related data, programs,  and funding for this workforce. We selected these agencies based on a  prior report in which we identified them as relevant to the aviation  workforce. To describe examples of stakeholder coordination, we also  conducted semi-structured interviews with a non-generalizable sample of  16 stakeholders including employers, Aviation Maintenance Technician  (AMT) Schools, unions, industry associations, and workforce training  organizations selected based on stakeholder recommendations, among  other factors, and conducted two site visits. We visited an AMT School  that serves the District of Columbia area and an aviation repair station, a  major commercial airline, and a state workforce organization in Georgia.  We selected these stakeholders and conducted these site visits to obtain  a range of perspectives and based on factors such as type of work  performed and geographic location. In addition, we reviewed relevant  agency documents, such as FAA’s 2019-2022 strategic plan and its  Aviation Workforce Steering Committee charter.

To describe what progress FAA has made on updating training curriculum  requirements for AMT Schools and certification testing standards for  mechanics, we reviewed relevant federal laws, regulations, and FAA  documents, and interviewed FAA officials.

We conducted this performance audit from January 2019 to February  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.

Different aviation industry employers have distinct workforce needs and  may require workers with specific skillsets depending on the type of work  performed. The aviation maintenance workforce includes FAA-certificated  mechanics and repairmen, as well as non-certificated workers.

FAA-certificated mechanics inspect, service, and repair aircraft  bodies (airframe) and engines (powerplant), and only they can  approve an aircraft for return to service. FAA-certificated mechanics  can earn an airframe rating, a powerplant rating, or an airframe and  powerplant (A&P) rating. It can take between 1 and 3 years to obtain  the required education or training to become certificated. If an FAA- certificated mechanic changes employers, the certificate remains  valid.

FAA-certificated repairmen service aircraft components and must  be recommended for certification by their employer to perform specific  tasks such as welding or painting. It can take more than a year to  obtain the required experience or training to become certificated.  FAA-certificated repairmen are employed by entities such as repair  stations that are authorized by FAA to perform specific tasks. A  repairman certificate is only valid at the employer for which it was  issued.

Non-certificated aviation maintenance workers include individuals  who are supervised by certificated mechanics or repairmen in  performing repair work.

FAA maintains data on certificated mechanics and repairmen, including  data on characteristics such as age and sex. FAA also maintains some  data on non-certificated workers, such as the number employed by FAA- certificated repair stations, but neither the federal government nor the  aviation industry maintains data on the total number of non-certificated  aviation maintenance workers.

Career pathways consist of education, training, and support services that  enable individuals to obtain industry-relevant certification and  employment. There are three distinct pathways to become eligible to take  the FAA mechanic tests—military training and experience, AMT School,  and practical, or civil work experience (see fig. 1). FAA collects data on  the use of the different pathways to becoming a certificated mechanic.  Individuals must pass the FAA mechanic tests to become certificated,  regardless of the pathway they take to become eligible to take the tests.  There are three tests—written, oral, and practical. FAA publishes testing  standards for the oral and practical skills tests.

Military training and experience. The Community College of the Air  Force administers an FAA-approved A&P training program which consists  of on-the-job training and various courses for military service members  with certain experience. When service members successfully complete  the program, the Joint Services Aviation Maintenance Technician  Certification Council issues them a certificate of eligibility to take the FAA  mechanic tests (see side bar).

Aviation Maintenance Technician School. Individuals may also attend  an FAA-approved AMT School to become eligible to take the FAA  mechanic tests. FAA approves and oversees AMT Schools and it  maintains enrollment and mechanic test pass-rate data for each school.  The minimum curriculum requirements for these schools are currently  prescribed in regulation. The regulation includes the subjects the  curriculum must cover and the number of training hours students must  complete to become eligible to take the FAA mechanic tests. Given that  AMT School curriculum requirements are in regulation, FAA has in the  past attempted to amend the requirements through the federal rulemaking  process.

Practical work experience. People can also become eligible to take the  FAA mechanic tests by demonstrating practical, or civil work experience.  Individuals may work under the supervision of a certificated mechanic for  18 months for either an airframe or powerplant certificate, or 30 months  for an A&P certificate. Practical work experience includes  apprenticeships, which combine on-the-job training with classroom  instruction.

For certificated repairmen, there is no prescribed test, though repairmen  must demonstrate their practical experience or have completed formal  training to be certificated. Avionics technicians also have no prescribed  test, but may seek certain related certifications.

The Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) system is a federal  statistical standard used to classify workers into occupational categories  for purposes of collecting, calculating, or disseminating data such as  employment levels and pay. The SOC structure forms the basis for the  occupational coding system used by BLS’ Occupational Employment  Statistics survey and Current Population Survey. Aviation maintenance  workers generally fall into the avionics technicians or the aircraft  mechanics and service technicians occupational group (see fig. 2). Both  occupational groups include certificated and non-certificated individuals.  The most recent revision to the SOC was for 2018.

Selected Federal Agencies and the Aviation Maintenance Workforce

In addition to the Department of Transportation (DOT) and FAA, several  other federal agencies play a role in developing and maintaining a  qualified aviation professional workforce. For example, we previously  reported on related efforts administered by DOD, DOL, VA, and  Education. These agencies provide either financial assistance for  education or training in aviation maintenance related fields or administer  programs that support career pathways to becoming an FAA-certificated  mechanic or repairman.

Existing Data Provide Limited Information about the Current Workforce and Potential Future Demand

Federal Data Provide Information on the Number of Certificated Mechanics and Repairmen but Likely Overestimate How Many Are Available to Fill Projected Openings

As of December 2018, about 295,000 individuals held a mechanic  certificate and about 35,000 held a repairman certificate. The median age  of FAA-certificated mechanics and repairmen was 54 years old, according  to our analysis of the FAA data. Specifically, 52 percent were between  the ages of 50 and 70 years old; 19 percent were between 39 and 49;  and 19 percent were between 18 and 38. The remaining 10 percent were  between the ages of 71 and 89 years old (see fig. 3). In comparison,  about 23 percent of the overall workforce was age 55 or over according to  BLS data as of 2018.

Our analysis of FAA data also found that 3 percent of all aviation  maintenance certificate holders were women as of December 2018. This  percentage has not changed since we last reported on this workforce in  2014. In comparison, BLS data as of 2018 show that women made-up 47  percent of the total workforce. We were not able to analyze other  demographic characteristics for these certificate holders, such as race or  ethnicity, because neither FAA nor BLS collects these data.

FAA data for 2015 through 2018 also provide some information on the  education and work experience of certificated mechanics. These data  show that attending AMT School was the most common pathway  certificated individuals used to qualify for the FAA tests to become  mechanics (see fig. 4).

In addition, FAA data provide information on the number of newly  certificated individuals and indicate that FAA certificated about 8,600  mechanics and repairmen on average each year for 2014 through 2018  (see fig. 5). BLS data project an annual average of 11,800 job openings in  the United States from 2018-2028 for the aircraft mechanics and service  technicians occupation due to growth and replacement, which include job  openings for both certificated and non-certificated workers.

The supply of workers to fill any open or projected job openings in the  aviation industry, however, not only depends on the number of people  qualified to do the work, but also their availability and willingness to work  at a certain wage and under particular working conditions. While FAA  data provide information on the number of mechanic and repairman  certificate holders who are qualified to perform certain work, less is known  about the number of them who are available and willing to work in the  aviation industry. FAA data show there were approximately 330,000  certificated mechanics and repairmen as of December 2018, but FAA  officials said this number likely overestimates the number of individuals  working in the aviation industry. BLS data indicate 136,900 were  employed in the aircraft mechanics and service technicians occupation in  2018, but it is not clear how many of those jobs were filled by FAA- certificated workers. In addition, it is unknown how many of the  approximately 330,000 certificate holders are retired, deceased, or  working in other industries. Individuals who obtain a mechanic certificate  from FAA may never work in the aviation industry, or may begin their  career in the aviation industry and leave for a job in another industry.  Several stakeholders we interviewed said FAA-certificated mechanics  possess certain skills that are transferrable to other industries and leave  the aviation industry to work for other employers, such as amusement  parks. Furthermore, officials explained that once certificated, there is no  certification renewal requirement for mechanics.

Federal Data Provide Some Information on Current Pay and Demand for Aviation Maintenance Workers, but Do Not Distinguish Between Certificated and Non- Certificated Workers

BLS publishes some data on pay for aircraft mechanics and service  technicians, such as average hourly and annual wages. However, the  occupational classification system BLS and other federal statistical  agencies use for aircraft mechanics and service technicians does not  distinguish between FAA-certificated and non-certificated workers. This  is in part because workers are classified by the work they perform and not  necessarily by certification or education, according to SOC classification  system principles. As a result, it is difficult to determine employment  characteristics such as pay for certificated workers, specifically.

BLS data as of May 2018 show that annual wages for aircraft mechanics  and service technicians ranged from about $37,000 to about $98,000.  According to BLS officials, it is not uncommon for there to be a wide  salary range across an occupation, as wages may vary depending on  factors such as experience, education, and skills. A DOD official we  interviewed also said that employers have told him that they pay  certificated aviation maintenance workers more than non-certificated  workers. BLS officials said they collected wage and employment data for  certificated workers separate from non-certificated workers in employer  surveys conducted between 2000 and 2012. However, officials said  they stopped collecting these data in part because employers  inconsistently reported them.

Data limitations at the federal and state levels also make it difficult to  determine the demand for certificated aviation maintenance workers.

BLS occupational data. On the federal level, BLS occupational  outlook data provide some information on potential future demand  nationwide for aviation maintenance workers, but the data do not  distinguish between certificated and non-certificated workers. As a  result, the data provide limited detail about the demand for certificated  workers, specifically. According to BLS data, total employment for the  aircraft mechanics and service technicians occupation is projected to  grow about 3 percent over the 2018 to 2028 time frame, which is  slower than the average for all occupations. As previously mentioned,  these data project an annual average of 11,800 job openings for this  occupation from 2018 to 2028 due to job growth and replacement.

DOL certification data. On its public website for career planning and  job search, CareerOneStop, DOL provides information on  certifications that are frequently mentioned in online job postings and  considered to be in-demand. DOL also indicates in its online  resources which certifications may draw on training and experience  gained in the military. However, DOL does not track or publish data on  the demand for occupational licenses, including federal licenses such  as FAA’s A&P certification. DOL officials said currently there are no  plans to expand the agency’s data collection to include information on  the demand for occupational licenses. DOL officials added that for  certain jobs that require licenses, the demand for the required  licenses mirrors occupational demand for those jobs so collecting  those data may not be as meaningful.

Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act plans. On the state  level, Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act plans, intended in  part to outline states’ use of federal funds to help workers meet  employers’ needs, provide some geographically-specific information  on the demand for workers in the aviation industry. Our review of  states’ most recent Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act plans  found that 19 states identified the aerospace and aviation industry as  a targeted sector for development. However, only certain plans  specifically mention the need for certificated mechanics; others refer  to the aviation industry more broadly.

Employers we interviewed had differing perspectives on potential growth  in demand for aviation maintenance workers; some said they were  experiencing difficulty finding enough workers to meet their needs, while  others said they were not experiencing difficulty. While some  stakeholders voiced concerns about the potential for a labor shortage, the  selected labor market indicators we reviewed for aircraft mechanics and  service technicians (unemployment, wages, and employment) from 2013  through 2018 were not all consistent with the existence of hiring  difficulties. See appendix I for our analysis.

Officials we interviewed from a regional airline said the majority of the  airline’s certificated mechanics come to them directly after completing  AMT School and that the airline was having a difficult time finding enough  mechanics to fill 60 open full-time positions. On the other hand, officials  we interviewed from a major airline said the airline rarely hires certificated  mechanics right out of AMT School and that their employees typically  come to them with a number of years of experience. The officials from the  major airline said that they were not experiencing difficulty recruiting and  retaining aviation maintenance workers, but noted that regional airlines  may experience hiring difficulties first if there is a shortage of these  workers because certificated mechanics often start their careers at  regional airlines to gain practical experience before moving on to work at  a major airline.

Government and Industry Programs Support the Workforce, but FAA Lacks Information that Could Advance Its Workforce Development Efforts

Government, Industry, and AMT Schools Administer Programs and Coordinate to Some Extent to Support the Development of Aviation Maintenance Workers’ Skills and Career Pathways

Registered Apprenticeship Program  Serving Underrepresented Populations   The Department of Labor awarded the  Connecticut Department of Labor Office of  Apprenticeship Training a $1,550,000 grant to  fund the Connecticut Apprenticeship  Expansion Rx project, which targets the  aviation industry, among others. The project  aims to serve over 1,600 apprentices and  provide underrepresented populations,  including women, dislocated, and under- employed individuals an opportunity to  acquire industry required credentials. Key  partners include industry, educational  institutions, and labor unions.

Registered Apprenticeship Program for  Airframe and Powerplant Mechanics  As part of the State Apprenticeship Expansion  grant, the Alaska Department of Labor and  Workforce Development (DOLWD) is  implementing registered apprenticeships in  aviation, a relatively new industry in using the  apprenticeship model. With the help of the  U.S. Department of Labor Office of  Apprenticeship in Alaska, two aviation  occupations have been approved: Airframe &  Powerplant Mechanic and Air Transport Pilot.  The Alaska state Apprenticeship Coordinator  is working closely with the U.S. Department of  Labor Office of Apprenticeship and individual  air carriers across Alaska to develop and  implement registered apprenticeships for  these occupations. Alaska DOLWD has  approximately 12 mechanic apprentices and 2  air transport pilot apprentices with various air  carrier employers. support Registered Apprenticeship Programs— employer-driven  training opportunities that combine on-the-job learning with related  classroom instruction. The program facilitates coordination among  different stakeholders such as industry, states, and educational  institutions to support apprenticeships and employment opportunities.  DOL awarded almost $3.8 million in grants and contracts from 2014  through 2018 to promote these apprenticeships for aviation  maintenance workers. For example, one grantee is aiming to serve  underrepresented populations in the aviation industry, including  women, and another is coordinating with industry to develop a  registered apprenticeship program for certificated mechanics (see  side bars). In addition, the United Services Military Apprenticeship  Program, a DOL registered program, provides service members an  opportunity to improve skills and qualify for employment in a  recognized civilian trade, including as an A&P mechanic, upon  completion of military service.

VA’s Post-9/11 GI Bill Program. The Post-9/11 Veterans  Educational Assistance Act of 2008 (Post-9/11 GI Bill) provides  funding for veterans to pursue an approved program of education,  including undergraduate and graduate degrees, non-college degree  programs, apprenticeships, and on-the-job training. VA data show  approximately $42 million in Post-9/11 GI Bill funds were awarded in  fiscal year 2018 to 4,200 veterans enrolled in aviation maintenance  post-secondary programs, which include programs at FAA-approved  AMT Schools.

Education’s financial assistance. Education provides billions of  dollars in federal assistance to support students pursuing higher  education, which may include training in aviation-related fields. We  previously reported that in academic year 2011-2012, Education  disbursed $918 million in federal grants to 142,708 recipients and  $1.3 billion in federal loans to 114,564 recipients pursuing aircraft  mechanic and avionics programs.

DOT’s workforce development grant program. DOT is also  developing a process for administering a workforce development  grant program for aviation maintenance workers. Specifically, the FAA  Reauthorization Act of 2018 included a provision for DOT to establish  an aviation maintenance workforce development grant program.  Once established, eligible entities such as aircraft repair stations,  unions, educational institutions, and state or local governments may  apply for grants. The program may provide grants for projects such as  establishing new educational programs or scholarships for individuals  seeking employment in the aviation maintenance industry and  supporting service members transitioning into aviation maintenance  related careers.

In addition, FAA has taken steps to engage other key stakeholders on  aviation workforce development initiatives. In September 2018, FAA  sponsored an Aviation Workforce Symposium that included participants  from industry, AMT Schools, and federal agencies such as Education and  DOL. Discussion topics included building the pipeline of workers,  maximizing efficiency in training, and promoting productive partnerships.  Subsequent to the 2018 symposium, FAA established an Aviation  Workforce Steering Committee in February 2019, in part to coordinate  efforts across FAA to address various workforce related provisions  included in the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018.

The steering committee finalized its charter in April 2019, and the charter  states FAA’s intentions of developing productive partnerships with  industry, government, and educational institutions to expand the pipeline  of aviation safety professionals. As of October 2019, FAA was finalizing a  working group structure to carry out the steering committee’s work that  will focus on: (1) marketing/communications, (2) educational outreach, (3)  training, and (4) partnerships. FAA officials also told us they plan to  collaborate with other federal agencies moving forward, including  Education, DOL, and DOD. For example, FAA and DOD officials said  they are currently discussing options for streamlining pathways for service  members with aviation maintenance backgrounds to move into civilian  careers in aviation maintenance. According to a DOD official, streamlining  pathways could increase the number of service members who become  FAA-certificated mechanics and leverage the skills of the over 250,000  current service members with aviation maintenance backgrounds.

Additional examples of states, industry employers, and AMT Schools  coordinating or partnering to support the aviation maintenance workforce  include:

Career grants. One state we visited developed a career grant to align  students’ programs of study with in-demand occupations in the state.  The grant provides tuition assistance to in-state residents working  toward selected certificates or degrees at eligible in-state colleges or  universities, including aviation maintenance programs.

Military pathway program. Officials from a regional airline we  interviewed said the airline developed a military transition program to  assist service members in preparing for the FAA mechanic tests. The  airline funds 100 percent of the program cost, which according to  officials is about $11,000 per person. As part of the program, airline  officials told us they provide about $5,000 worth of tools to each  participant.

Training equipment and funding. Officials we interviewed from one  school said they strategically opened their AMT program next to a  major cargo airline so that students could benefit from employment  opportunities there. The officials said the airline also benefits from the  close proximity of the school in that it is able to leverage local talent,  and the airline provides AMT School students with scholarships,  technical support, and surplus equipment to use for training. In  another example, officials from a major commercial airline told us the  airline partners with over 40 AMT Schools and provides them with  funding to improve operations and recruitment. Officials said the goal  of the program is to ensure the airline has a pipeline of workers to fill  any future job openings.

FAA Does Not Use Existing Data to Strategically Target Its Resources and Workforce Development Efforts

Despite FAA’s recent efforts to coordinate with other federal agencies on  expanding and streamlining pathways for aviation maintenance careers,  we found that FAA does not routinely analyze, collect, or coordinate with  other stakeholders on certain related data. Such activities could assist  FAA in measuring progress toward meeting its workforce related  objectives and inform strategic decisions for promoting the development  of this workforce. For example, FAA’s strategic plan includes an objective  on promoting the development of a robust aviation workforce. In  addition, FAA’s Aviation Workforce Steering Committee charter  emphasizes providing diverse populations, including youth, women, and  minorities, with clear pathways into aviation careers to expand the talent  pool from which both government and industry may recruit. However,  neither the strategic plan nor the steering committee charter provides  specific information on how FAA plans to select and measure any efforts  it undertakes related to these objectives. Prior GAO work has  emphasized that strategic workforce planning requires monitoring and  evaluating progress toward goals, and federal internal control standards  state that management should use quality information to achieve its  objectives. We identified several areas in which improved data analysis,  collection, or coordination could assist FAA in measuring progress and  understanding how to target its resources in support of its workforce  related objectives.

Demographic data. FAA collects certain demographic data on its  A&P certification application, such as the age and sex of individuals;  however, FAA currently uses these data only to determine eligibility  and issue certificates, according to FAA officials. These data could  also be used to identify patterns or relationships, such as the trend in  female certificate holders by pathway, which could be useful  information as FAA aims to increase opportunities for women to  pursue aviation maintenance careers.

In addition, FAA does not currently collect data on the race and  ethnicity of certificated individuals. Such data could provide additional  information on the demographics of certificated individuals and help  FAA or other stakeholders monitor the progress of any efforts to  diversify this workforce. FAA could also leverage BLS data on the  race and ethnicity of certificated and non-certificated aircraft  mechanics and service technicians more broadly as it begins to  develop and implement any activities related to expanding and  diversifying the talent pool for recruiting workers into aviation  maintenance careers.

Pathway data. FAA also maintains mechanic pathway data, but these  data do not provide a complete picture of certificated individuals’  education, training, and work experience due to certain data  limitations. For example, FAA does not require AMT Schools to report  program completion data. As a result, it does not have information  such as how many students who enter FAA-approved AMT Schools  complete the program. Moreover, FAA does not analyze nationwide  trends for AMT Schools using existing data on these schools (such as  enrollment or mechanic test pass-rate data) or aggregate information  across AMT Schools to better understand the AMT School pathway  as a whole.

In addition, pathway data collected by FAA do not clearly differentiate  between civil and military work experience. Specifically, FAA officials  said practical, or civil, work experience pathway data may include  information on individuals with both prior military and civil experience.  Moreover, according to an FAA official, FAA’s military experience  pathway data may include individuals who completed DOD’s FAA- approved A&P training program as well as individuals who met FAA’s  on-the-job training requirements through relevant military experience.  Combined pathway data may limit FAA’s and DOD’s understanding of  DOD’s contributions to this workforce, including the number of  individuals who completed DOD’s FAA-approved A&P training  program and subsequently obtained mechanic certification from FAA.

Supply and demand data. Other federal agencies, such as BLS and  DOD, maintain data that relate to this workforce more broadly that  could be useful to FAA. For example, FAA could leverage BLS data  on the projected employment of certificated and non-certificated  aircraft mechanics and service technicians in conjunction with its data  on newly certificated workers each year to better understand worker  supply and demand. DOD also maintains information on separating  service members with aviation maintenance backgrounds, who may  be attractive to the commercial aviation industry. For example,  according to a DOD official, in fiscal year 2018 over 22,000 service  members with aviation maintenance backgrounds separated from the  Air Force and Navy. Additional data analysis and coordination could  potentially yield useful information on worker supply and demand and  areas for promoting the development of this workforce.

Without routinely analyzing its existing data on certificated workers,  collecting additional data, or leveraging existing workforce data  maintained by other federal agencies, FAA will not have certain  information it needs to measure progress and strategically target its  resources toward its objective of promoting the development of a robust  aviation workforce. A robust aviation workforce, including certificated  mechanics and repairmen, is necessary for maintaining a safe aviation  system. FAA’s recently developed Aviation Workforce Steering  Committee presents the agency with an opportunity to engage other  federal agencies in discussions on how to leverage data to expand and  diversify this workforce.

FAA Has Proposed Changing Its Decades Old Mechanic Curriculum Requirements and Its Testing Standards, and Revisions to Them Are Ongoing

Even as FAA’s strategic plan states the agency’s focus on promoting the  development of a skilled aviation maintenance workforce to integrate new  technologies, the agency has acknowledged that the current curriculum  requirements for AMT Schools and mechanic testing standards are  outdated. Efforts to revise the curriculum requirements for AMT Schools  are ongoing through the rulemaking process, and FAA is also currently  updating the testing standards for mechanics.

The curriculum requirements for AMT Schools have remained largely  unchanged for several decades despite numerous attempts to update  them as aviation technology has evolved. The minimum requirements are  established in regulation and list the subjects that AMT Schools must  include in their training curriculum for individuals to be eligible to take  FAA’s mechanic tests. FAA officials, employers, and AMT School  officials we interviewed said the current curriculum requirements do not  emphasize commonly used modern aircraft technologies, such as  avionics and composite materials. Because the curriculum requirements  are established in federal regulation, FAA has attempted several times to  revise them through the rulemaking process. Table 1 provides selected  changes or actions relating to these requirements.

FAA officials noted several challenges to updating the AMT School  curriculum requirements, including competing demands at the department  level, the extent of comments FAA has received from stakeholders in  response to proposed changes, and the amount of time required to  coordinate with internal stakeholders during the review process. We  previously reported on factors that affect the amount of time needed to  issue a rule for selected agencies, which included similar challenges such  as the complexity of an issue, agency management priorities, and the  amount of review required at different phases of the rulemaking  process.

In October 2015, FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)  with the stated goal of updating the existing AMT School curriculum and  providing an efficient means of changing specific course items by  including them in each school’s operations specifications (see fig. 6).  This would eliminate the need to go through the federal rulemaking  process to update the curriculum. As part of its ongoing efforts to revise  the curriculum requirements for AMT Schools through the rulemaking  process, FAA issued a supplemental NPRM in the April 2019 Federal  Register that expanded the scope of the NPRM it issued in October 2015  (see fig. 6). Comments on the supplemental NPRM were due in June  2019. As of October 2019, FAA officials said they were in the process of  reviewing the comments.

In a separate effort outside of the rulemaking process, FAA is currently  updating the testing standards for mechanics. The standards were last  revised in 2015. FAA has acknowledged that current mechanic testing  standards are also outdated. As a result, aviation stakeholders have  stated that the mechanic tests include outdated or irrelevant questions.  For example, the practical test may include projects on wood airframes  and fabric coverings, which are not common to modern commercial  aircraft. FAA has stated that the revised testing standards will provide a  comprehensive framework for the mechanic tests and serve as a guide  for reviewing and revising the oral and written test questions and the  practical projects.

FAA officials said two offices within the agency are responsible for  updating AMT School training curriculum requirements and mechanic  testing standards and that these offices have been coordinating efforts to  align the two. FAA’s efforts to modernize the curriculum requirements  for AMT Schools and its efforts to update the mechanic testing standards  started on slightly different paths, in part due to differences in when the  working groups were formed and recommendations to address these  issues were made (see fig. 7).

As of October 2019, FAA had not issued a final rule for modernizing AMT  School curriculum requirements as required by the FAA Reauthorization  Act of 2018, and it was still in the process of updating testing standards.  FAA officials have indicated that they have informed the appropriate  committees in Congress that the proposed schedule for issuance of a  final rule is in October 2020 and said that the revised mechanic testing  standards would likely be finalized after the publication of the final rule  amending the curriculum requirements for AMT Schools. An FAA official  noted that any delay in finalizing the rule would likely result in a  corresponding delay to finalizing the testing standards. Delaying the  release of the updated mechanic testing standards could result in the  prolonged use of outdated or irrelevant questions on the mechanic tests.  FAA officials said that once finalized and implemented, the updated  curriculum requirements for AMT Schools and the mechanic testing  standards for individuals should be mostly aligned.

A sufficient supply of aviation maintenance workers is critical to  maintaining a safe and robust aviation system and meeting the growing  demand for air travel. Current training and skills requirements for these  workers are also important because of changing flight technology. Both  the federal government and other industries benefit from having a  professional, trained, and qualified workforce, and addressing aviation  workforce needs is a shared responsibility among these different  stakeholders. As the federal agency responsible for certificating aircraft  mechanics and repairmen, FAA maintains certain demographic  information on these individuals that could shed light on the  characteristics and employment of these personnel. However, without  strategically using or analyzing the data it has along with data other  stakeholders collect, FAA will not have certain information it needs to  target its resources or measure and improve progress toward its aviation  workforce goals. It may also miss the opportunity to provide other  stakeholders with valuable information for supporting these workers.  Other agencies and stakeholders may also assist FAA in understanding  and promoting the development of the aviation maintenance workforce.  FAA’s recently developed Aviation Workforce Steering Committee  presents the agency with an opportunity to engage other federal agencies  to explore potential data sources and their usefulness and discuss ways  to expand, diversify, and strengthen career pathways for the aviation  maintenance workforce.

The Administrator of FAA should direct the Aviation Workforce Steering  Committee, as part of its ongoing efforts, to take steps to use existing  FAA data and coordinate with other federal agencies to identify and  gather the information it needs to measure progress and target resources  toward its goal of promoting a robust, qualified, and diverse aviation  maintenance workforce. For example, FAA could task a committee  working group with developing and implementing ways to improve data  sharing among federal agencies to inform decision-making on how to  strengthen career pathways and better understand the supply and  demand of certificated workers. (Recommendation 1)

We provided a draft of this report to DOT, DOL, Education, DOD, and VA  for review and comment. DOT provided written comments, which are  reprinted in appendix II. DOT concurred with our recommendation.  Specifically, DOT agreed that using existing data could potentially  contribute to its efforts to develop the aviation maintenance workforce.  DOT said it will ask the Aviation Workforce Steering Committee to  consider using existing FAA data and to coordinate with other federal  agencies regarding other potential data sources to support the FAA’s  aviation maintenance workforce goals. DOL provided technical  comments, which we incorporated in the report as appropriate.

We are sending copies of this report to the appropriate congressional  committees, the Secretary of the Department of Transportation, the  Secretary of the Department of Labor, the Secretary of the Department of  Education, the Secretary of the Department of Defense, the Secretary of  the Department of Veterans Affairs, and other interested parties. 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) 512-7215 or gurkinc@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 III.

Appendix I: Labor Market Indicator Analysis

While no single metric can be used to determine whether a labor shortage  exists, certain indicators in conjunction with views of stakeholders can  provide insight on this issue. We previously found, based on our review of  economic research, that an occupation experiencing a labor shortage  would exhibit the following: (1) a low unemployment rate signaling limited  availability of workers in that profession, (2) increases in wages offered to  draw people into that profession, and (3) increases in employment due to  increases in demand for that occupation. Table 2 shows these specific  indicators from 2013 through 2018 for the aircraft mechanics and service  technicians occupation, measured using Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)  Current Population Survey data.

According to our analysis of BLS data from 2013 through 2018,  unemployment rate and change in median wage earnings for the aircraft  mechanics and service technicians occupation, which includes both  Federal Aviation Administration-certificated and non-certificated workers,  were consistent with the existence of hiring difficulties, while the percent  change in employment was not.

Data on two of the three indicators (unemployment rate and wage  earnings) were consistent with difficulties in hiring aircraft mechanics and  service technicians. However, because these data combine information  for certificated and non-certificated workers, it is difficult to know the  extent to which any hiring difficulties represent demand for certificated  workers, specifically. In addition, the indicators should be viewed with  appropriate caveats. For example, while median wages increased for  aircraft mechanics and service technicians in 2018 compared to 2013,  they did not increase in every year—and they exhibited decreases of as  much as 6.7 percent.

The direction of change of the employment indicator was not consistent  with hiring difficulties for this occupation. As shown in table 2, from 2013  through 2018, employment for aircraft mechanics and service technicians  does not appear to have changed, while employment for all other  occupations increased. However, employment for this occupation did not  remain constant in every year over that time period and exhibited  increases of as much as 12.5 percent and decreases of as much as 21.9  percent.

Appendix II: Department of Transportation Agency Comments

Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments

Chelsa Kenney Gurkin at (202) 512-7215 or Gurkinc@gao.gov.

In addition to the contact named above, Betty Ward-Zukerman (Assistant  Director), Meredith Moore (Analyst-in-Charge), Ellie Klein, and Chris  Woika made key contributions to this report. Additional assistance was  provided by James Bennett, Lilia Chaidez, Holly Dye, Serena Lo, Sheila  R. McCoy, John Mingus, Michael Naretta, James Rebbe, Almeta  Spencer, and Andrew Von Ah.

The Federal Aviation Administration requires aircraft be repaired and approved for flight only by mechanics who are “certificated” by the FAA. FAA oversees the certification process of these mechanics and of repairmen who fix aircraft parts. Some stakeholders are concerned that retirements and attrition could reduce the number of certificated workers needed to meet the growing demand for air travel.

One of FAA’s goals is to promote the development of a robust and diverse workforce, but it doesn’t collect or analyze data to measure progress toward its goal.

We recommend that FAA make better use of existing data to measure this progress.