What public datasets or FOIA requests exist that track allegations of abuse in ICE custody by year?
Executive summary
Public tracking of allegations of abuse in ICE custody exists in a patchwork of official reports, academic reconstructions and media-obtained records rather than a single comprehensive public dataset; researchers and advocates have relied on ICE’s Facility Significant Incident Reports, datasets obtained via FOIA by academics and NGOs, Office of Inspector General records, hotline/DRIL logs and investigative compilations to assemble year-by-year counts [1] [2] [3] [4]. These sources show recurring tallies — for example studies cite hundreds to thousands of sexual-abuse allegations across multi-year spans — but they differ in scope, timeframe and the degree to which allegations are investigated or substantiated [5] [6] [1].
1. The ICE Facility Significant Incident Reports: recurring, machine-readable snapshots
ICE Facility Significant Incident Reports — produced annually by a third party since at least 2018 and including monthly sexual abuse and assault allegation reports submitted by facilities — have been digitally transformed and analyzed by scholars to produce year-by-year tallies for 2018–2022, and are a primary source used in peer-reviewed work on sexual-assault allegations in ICE custody [1].
2. FOIA-derived detention datasets used by researchers and Vera Institute
Comprehensive custody and incident datasets used to analyze detention trends were obtained via FOIA by academics (including David Hausman), the ACLU and the Deportation Data Project and form the backbone of Vera Institute’s ICE Detention Trends tool, which compiles detention histories from fiscal years 2009 onward — these FOIA pulls supply the basic, date-stamped records researchers need to link allegations to facility and year [2].
3. OIG records and media FOIA work: the basis for historic allegation counts
Investigative reporting that quantified thousands of abuse complaints relied on Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General records and other FOIA-obtained materials; for instance, reporting summarized that ICE’s own reports documented roughly 1,310 sexual-abuse allegations in FY2013–2017 and that broader OIG data covered complaints going back a decade, a dataset obtained and publicized through journalistic FOIA efforts [6] [3].
4. Hotlines and NGO compilations: DRIL and Freedom for Immigrants analyses
Non-governmental groups have compiled year-by-year indicators from complementary sources such as the ICE ERO Detention Reporting and Information Line (DRIL) calls and internal complaint logs; Freedom for Immigrants analyzed DRIL calls from October 2012–March 2016 to identify facilities with the highest counts of sexual and physical abuse reports, providing another public-facing timeline of allegations [4].
5. Investigative units and local record requests: Futuro Investigates and newsrooms
Newsroom investigations — for example by Futuro Investigates/PBS — obtained facility-level complaint records and aggregated hundreds of allegations over recent six-year stretches, demonstrating how targeted records requests and state/local public-record laws can produce year-by-year tallies even when central federal dashboards do not publish comprehensive allegation counts [7].
6. What these sources do — and do not — capture about “allegations by year”
All of these datasets and FOIA-obtained records capture allegations with timestamps and facility identifiers that allow researchers to report counts by year, but they vary in what they publish: ICE’s public statistics portal provides custody and population data but not a centralized, fully transparent year-by-year allegation register; academic reconstructions and FOIA compilations fill that gap while acknowledging underreporting and differences between allegations received and allegations substantiated [8] [1].
7. Institutional response, political probes and the limits of public datasets
Congressional probes and staff compilations — such as the Senate inquiry materials cited by reporters and staff reports that catalogue instances of abuse — provide another layer of year-linked allegations and confirmed incidents, but these often reflect selective compilations tied to oversight agendas and do not replace systematic annual public reporting by ICE [9] [10].
8. Practical next steps for year-by-year tracking and FOIA strategy
For rigorous year-by-year analysis, combine: (a) ICE Facility Significant Incident Reports (2018–present) transformed into machine-readable form [1]; (b) FOIA-obtained custody/incident datasets used by Hausman/ACLU/Deportation Data Project and surfaced in Vera’s dashboard [2]; (c) OIG complaint exports and media-requested records for earlier years [3]; and (d) NGO/DRIL logs for corroboration of underreported categories [4]. Transparency advocates note these methods are necessary because no single, consistently public ICE dataset comprehensively publishes all allegations and outcomes by year [1] [2].