House Homeland Security hearing examines role of NGOs in border crisis and gaps in tracking unaccompanied children

The House Committee on Homeland Security held a contentious hearing to examine the role federally funded nongovernmental organizations played during what Republican members termed the “border crisis,” focusing on how grants and contracts were used and how unaccompanied children (UACs) were tracked after placement.

The hearing opened with Chairman Michael Guest saying the committee would "examine the role that taxpayer supported nongovernmental agencies played in facilitating the border crisis under the Biden Harris administration," and alleging that FEMA grant programs and other federal funding were routed to NGOs that helped process and move migrants after release from custody.

Why it matters: Republican members and several witnesses described a system they said created both perverse incentives and accountability gaps — with large sums moving through FEMA and other programs to organizations that grew rapidly during the period of high migration. Democratic members and other witnesses objected to broad allegations that charities and faith-based organizations intentionally facilitated illegal conduct, and repeatedly warned the committee not to conflate the majority of humanitarian providers with actors accused of mismanagement.

Oversight and funding. Mike Howell, president of the Oversight Project, testified that FEMA’s Emergency Food and Shelter program and related shelter-and-services grants were used to place migrants in hotels and other temporary housing the government funded. Howell said his group’s research tracked cell-phone movement from a small sample of devices associated with service locations and found those devices reached many congressional districts. Howell characterized the system as a "border industrial complex" and said nonprofits that relied heavily on federal grants had seen large increases in revenue during the period under review.

Children and safeguards. Ali (Lehi) Hopper, president of Guard Against Trafficking, described field research, audits and interviews that she said showed failures in vetting sponsors, inadequate post‑placement follow up and instances of abuse. Hopper told the committee that, in her view, "it was easier to sponsor a child than to adopt a dog," and said an HHS audit had found that many sponsor applications were fraudulent and that thousands of calls to a UAC welfare hotline went unanswered. When asked by members, Hopper cited an estimate she and her research partners reported that more than 325,000 children were, at some point, unaccounted for in placement records — a number she said came from compiled reports and program audits.

Allegations of misuse and weak documentation. Committee members and witnesses referenced multiple audits and news reports that found poor documentation for millions in grant spending, contracts awarded without bids, and steep increases in CEO compensation at some large providers. Howell and Hopper cited examples including Endeavors and Southwest Key (as named in testimony and reporting), and described auditors’ findings that raised questions about receipts, sponsor vetting, and living conditions at surge facilities.

Defense and disagreement. Democratic members, including Ranking Member Bennie Thompson, cautioned against broadbrush attacks on all NGOs and stressed that many faith‑based and secular nonprofits provide lawful, lifesaving services. Thompson said the committee had not invited some federal agency witnesses he would expect to see, such as FEMA officials, and argued that the hearing risked targeting religious organizations that perform humanitarian work.

Policy recommendations and next steps. Witnesses recommended several remedial steps repeatedly in testimony and questioning: standardized federal tracking for UAC placements, forensic audits of large contracts (Hopper urged audits of ORR contracts above specified thresholds), clawbacks for misspent funds, and stronger contractual requirements that recipients maintain records and permit oversight. Several members said legislation could be required to clarify data and reporting responsibilities when federal funds are issued for migrant shelter and placement.

What the record shows and what it does not. Committee members and witnesses used audits, IRS filings and news reporting as evidence of rapid revenue growth at some large contractors and gaps in sponsor vetting. The hearing record contains competing claims about the scale of abuse, the proportion of NGOs that mismanaged funds, and the legal reach of particular agencies; where claims were made in testimony, the article attributes them to those speakers rather than treating them as established fact.

The committee did not adopt policy at the hearing. Members on both sides announced intentions to pursue additional oversight, and several members moved or threatened subpoenas during the proceeding (see related “Votes at a glance” brief). The hearing record remains open for additional submissions and responses from witnesses and agencies.

Ending note: Members repeatedly returned to the same policy tension — how to ensure care for vulnerable migrants, including children, while tightening accountability for federal dollars and protecting lawful charities from politically motivated scrutiny. Several lawmakers said they planned to pursue legislation or oversight steps to address gaps in recordkeeping and sponsor vetting discussed in the hearing.