chevron-down Created with Sketch Beta.

Just Resolutions

September 2024 – Ombuds Committee

Ombudsing in Immigration Detention: Advocating for the Right Solution Through Communication

Office of the Immigration Detention Ombudsman (OIDO)

Ombudsing in Immigration Detention: Advocating for the Right Solution Through Communication
Brothers91 via Getty Images

Jump to:

What does ombudsing in the world of government oversight, specifically in immigration detention, look like?

Classical (or traditional) and advocate ombudsmen typically investigate and resolve complaints, and are tasked with the difficult mission of reconciling the needs of both the complainant and the organization. We have duties towards all involved parties, and because of this, we must remain neutral, confidential, and independent. We are also advocates, however, in the sense that we advocate for solutions to problems, rather than for one party or another.

The line between advocacy, on the one hand, and neutrality, confidentiality, and independence, on the other, is fine—especially in the world of federal immigration detention. The Office of the Immigration Detention Ombudsman (OIDO), an independent office within the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, is very familiar with balancing the professional requirements of neutrality, confidentiality, and independence with the high-stakes conflicts of interest that occur frequently in immigration detention. Our office is guided by a commitment to ensuring that detention conditions are humane, as well as a commitment to deploy the best of ombudsing practices in this challenging space.

OIDO stands apart from other entities that oversee immigration detention because we’re not traditional oversight, we’re ombuds. We have chosen to utilize a mix of the two main ombuds models—classical/traditional and organizational—and we’re able to work with both internal (other DHS agencies) and external (detained individuals and their lawyers, friends and family, and other advocates) stakeholders.

OIDO uses ombudsing principles to more pragmatically oversee immigration detention spaces and functions—methods which cut down on clogged bureaucracy and promote humane conditions in detention. These methods are rooted, above all else, in communication. This is at the core of what we do.

OIDO’s dedication to open communication and neutral mediation makes dialogue possible even within government institutions and across differences of every kind, including power, privilege, occupation, and legal status.

It could be easy to lose sight of the principles of neutrality, confidentiality, and independence, given the enormity and sensitivity of the task. Bringing ombuds practices to spaces that inadvertently disincentivize or impede these same conversations requires a specific and nuanced approach to communication—one that is holistic, trauma-informed, and victim-centered. Such ideals are exemplified by OIDO: we meet with each complainant as well as with each party who has a stake in the complaint. We work the issues out at the lowest level possible—in some cases, even before a complaint is formally submitted. As we do so, we demonstrate respect and care for all involved and a determination to resolve problems creatively, even when no formal resolution can be reached.

How do we facilitate successful communication in conditions where stakes are high and timeliness is critical, while still addressing the needs of both parties in an oversight setting? What does this actually look like?

First, it is necessary for any OIDO representative stepping into a detention facility to recognize that all individuals there have a right to respect and dignity, whether they are detained individuals or facility staff. We build trust. For example, OIDO case managers’ persistent presence in the field—cultivated by having case managers at facilities throughout the country—means that we can meet with detained persons literally wherever they are in the country.  Also, it means we can meet with facility staff where they are, rather than addressing field concerns from a remote headquarters office, which sometimes defaults to a cumbersome bureaucratic process that may delay redress to the detained person and impede the ability of facility staff to quickly and effectively address problems. But also, OIDO’s commitment towards being something more than oversight, towards being ombudsmen, means that beyond considering compliance with rules and standards, we also value and acknowledge detainees’ individual experiences. We strive to convey to our stakeholders that we are not mechanized bureaucrats; we are humans working to resolve human issues.

Our approach is particularly important when engaging with vulnerable populations who may have suffered trauma or have been subject to discrimination or persecution in their home countries. As a result, they may be distrustful of any institutional or governmental processes and may either be unaware of how, or even unwilling, to work the system. Our human-centered, trauma-informed, and victim-aware communicative approach facilitates trust, rapport, and dialogue to arrive at the quickest solution at the lowest level possible.

Human communication, at its core, is as multifaceted as the individuals we encounter in the field on a daily basis. Each party has a different need and a different story. OIDO must alter our responses according to these needs, so that the allegedly harmed person ultimately feels their story is heard. We listen, too, to facility staff and seek understanding of their processes and needs. Indeed, many of our OIDO staff have experience in immigration from years working in other federal offices responsible for immigration or incarceration. The crucial element here is that we listen actively and purposefully to understand: ask about desired outcomes, validate each party’s concerns, and work towards a mutually acceptable solution with intention and care. It is the personal touch that makes OIDO so successful.

Immigration detention conditions are not limited to just the physical environment of the facilities themselves but also include social-cultural, medical, economic, recreational, and personal needs. Amid so much complexity, ombudsmen must remain an advocate not for a particular party, but instead for a mission. OIDO’s specific mission is to promote and support safe and humane conditions in immigration detention with objectivity and neutrality. However, “neutrality” does not mean “indifference,” and can be a challenge to achieve, for any ombuds. As we navigate through a variety of difficult situations, OIDO is guided by empathy and respect for the dignity of its diverse stakeholders, which includes detained persons and their friends and family, as well as Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers and non-governmental organizations.

As with all ombudsmen, OIDO faces challenges, such as those presented by power differentials: what should its role be in the face of ongoing imbalances of power? How to balance these challenges posed by navigating power structures with the need to maintain neutrality? Additionally, how to balance information-sharing with duties of confidentiality? As it has worked through these challenges throughout its five-year tenure, OIDO has learned first-hand the value of bringing ombuds practices to bear upon its unique oversight model.