Putting TRAC to Work
  Policy and Public Interest Groups
Institute for Defense Analysis
September 2019

A Benefit-Cost Analysis of Expanding Federally Funded Counsel Programs for Unaccompanied Immigrant Children in Removal Proceedings in the United States
By Bryan W. Roberts, Dennis W. Kuo, Nathaniel T. Latshaw and John E. Whitley

We utilize data from the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) at Syracuse University, which consists of all immigration court cases with an initial NTA in FY 2008–2016. This includes detailed information on the corresponding 8,685,550 hearings and 2,838,781 proceedings seen by EOIR from October 1, 2007 to January 2, 2018.93 At the hearing level, we have the court date of the hearing, adjournment code, and hearing type to distinguish master calendar and merits hearings from custody hearings and other appearances outside the scope of this study. For each proceeding, we have the final decision made by the immigration judge, NTA date, decision date, immigration court city, migrant country of origin, primary language of the migrant, and multiple UAC indicators. To determine which cases involve a UAC, TRAC collects two UAC indicators. The first denotes DHS’s designation on the NTA, which is the same designation that CBP assigns upon apprehension of the migrant, and which would allow us to sufficiently define a UAC study population. Unfortunately, this UAC indicator was only populated starting in FY 2014. We describe in detail in section A of Appendix A how we develop a UAC designator, given this limitation. We also drop observations that are outside the scope of this study or are logically inconsistent.94 After making these drops, our regressions include 147,407 cases......[Citing TRAC data].

Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, Syracuse University
Copyright 2019
TRAC TRAC at Work TRAC TRAC at Work News Organizations News Organizations