Fact check: What is the average pass rate for ICE agents on the physical fitness test?

1. Why the supplied sources fail to answer the question, and what they do cover

Every analysis entry explicitly states that the document reviewed does not report an average pass rate for ICE’s physical fitness test, making the core data point absent from the corpus. The materials focus instead on recruitment volume and demographic mix — for example, a large influx of applicants amid a recruitment push ^[1] — anecdotal profiles of applicants including veterans and former officers ^[2], and a separate account of an officer’s conduct that does not address test outcomes ^[3]. One source details non‑ICE fitness tests and police academy standards ^{[4] [5]}, but these are not ICE pass‑rate statistics and cannot be used as a substitute.

2. What the recruitment and applicant‑profile pieces imply — possibilities, not facts

The recruitment reporting suggests ICE received large candidate pools amid policy changes and incentives, including sign‑on bonuses and relaxed age rules, which could alter the applicant mix and potentially affect pass rates because more applicants and a greater share of veterans or former officers might raise or lower average fitness outcomes ^{[1] [2]}. However, the supplied texts present only contextual signals — applicant quantity and backgrounds — without linking those signals to measured outcomes like pass percentages or cohort testing results ^{[1] [2]}. Any numerical claim about pass rates would therefore be speculative absent direct test data.

3. Cross‑checking with non‑ICE fitness‑test descriptions in the files

One supplied analysis summarizes other organizations’ physical fitness tests — military tests and a Vermont police academy regimen — outlining components and minimum percentile standards ^{[4] [5]}. Those descriptions illustrate how different tests vary in content and passing thresholds, underscoring that “pass rate” is contingent on test design, standards, and candidate pool composition. Because ICE’s test protocol and scoring are not described in the materials, these analogies cannot produce an ICE pass‑rate estimate; they merely show that pass rates are inherently context‑specific and sensitive to the test’s elements and thresholds ^{[4] [5]}.

4. Timeline and recency: what the documents cover and their dates

The supplied materials cluster in September and December 2025, with recruitment and applicant‑profile pieces dated September 10 and September 26, 2025, and at least one academy testing description dated December 9, 2025 ^{[1] [2] [3] [4] [5]}. These dates mean the corpus is recent as of late 2025 but still contains no ICE fitness outcomes. The recency increases the relevance of recruitment context, yet the absence of test‑pass statistics remains consistent across all items regardless of publication date ^[1].

5. Divergent narratives and potential agendas in the supplied pieces

The recruitment stories emphasize broad public interest in ICE jobs and policy choices that expand applicant pools, while profile pieces highlight sympathetic or politically charged applicant backgrounds, and an incident piece spotlights alleged force by an ICE officer ^{[1] [2] [3]}. These differing emphases suggest editorial aims: one set underscores workforce growth and policy impact, another humanizes applicants, and another scrutinizes conduct. None of these agendas required or produced pass‑rate data, making it likely the omission was editorial or data‑availability driven rather than an oversight about fitness outcomes ^{[1] [2] [3]}.

6. What would be needed to answer the question authoritatively

An authoritative average pass rate requires primary data from ICE or DHS (testing cohorts, number tested, number passed, date ranges, and test standard definitions) or a credible study aggregating such figures. The current corpus lacks those primary numbers; it provides only circumstantial evidence about applicant characteristics and analogous tests. Without access to ICE/DHS release documents, internal human‑resources reports, or peer‑reviewed analyses of ICE recruiting outcomes, no evidence‑based average pass‑rate figure can be derived from the provided materials ^[1].

7. Bottom line and next steps for the user who wants a numeric answer

Based solely on the materials supplied, no numeric average pass rate for ICE’s physical fitness test can be reported; the corpus contains contextual reporting but no test statistics ^{[1] [2] [3] [4] [5]}. To obtain a reliable figure, request or consult ICE/DHS official testing results, a Freedom of Information Act disclosure of recruitment testing metrics, or a peer‑reviewed study that aggregates ICE candidate physical‑test outcomes. Those sources would supply the primary data necessary to convert context into a verified pass‑rate statistic.