What do the ICE/FLETC syllabi for ERO basic training list under 'conflict management' or 'de‑escalation'?

1. What the agencies publicly list: course inclusion and framework

Official FLETC pages and DHS statements explicitly list conflict management and de‑escalation as part of the basic training curriculum for ICE/ERO students, noting that FLETC developed curricula and a framework to deliver those subjects across ICE basic courses ^{[1] [5] [2]}; FLETC’s Behavioral Science Division began reviewing and updating Conflict Management content in 2017 and has undertaken research and partnerships to identify de‑escalation practices from real‑world encounters ^[3].

2. What the syllabi (and their availability) actually show — and what is missing from public documents

The publicly accessible FLETC catalog describes that each program provides a syllabus and training materials, but the searchable catalog entries and ICE handbooks in the public record supplied here do not reproduce a line‑by‑line ERO syllabus excerpt listing specific de‑escalation modules, lesson plans, or learning objectives for “conflict management” in a way that allows independent verification of exact techniques taught ^{[5] [6] [7]}; therefore, the available sources confirm inclusion of conflict management as a subject but do not provide a detailed, publicly posted syllabus text in the provided documents ^{[5] [6]}.

3. Independent reporting and document disclosures: emphasis and critique

Investigations that reviewed training materials and related documents reported that ICE training contains extensive use‑of‑force instruction and guidance on legal justification for force and incident documentation, and that those materials “say little about de‑escalation,” suggesting a stronger focus on when and how force is justified than on step‑by‑step de‑escalation tactics ^[4]; contemporaneous Department statements, however, maintain that de‑escalation and conflict management are components of the FLETC regimen for ICE recruits ^[1].

4. FLETC’s research and stated approach to improving de‑escalation

FLETC’s Behavioral Science Division and its partners have described active efforts to analyze body‑worn camera and video footage to code behaviors and outcomes and to translate those findings into improved training on conflict management and de‑escalation, indicating an institutional recognition of the need to refine practical tactics and measure outcomes ^[3]; DHS also framed recent expansions of FLETC capacity as enabling broader delivery of the same basic subject matter content, including conflict management ^[1].

5. Gaps, competing narratives, and what can be reliably concluded

What can be reliably concluded from the supplied sources is that conflict management and de‑escalation are named components of ERO basic training at FLETC ^{[1] [2]} and that FLETC has undertaken research to improve de‑escalation instruction ^[3]; however, the provided materials and public handbooks do not include a verbatim syllabus section detailing lesson‑by‑lesson de‑escalation techniques for ERO basic training, and investigative reporting warns that the balance of documented training materials may emphasize lawful use‑of‑force justification over operational de‑escalation drills ^{[4] [6]}.

6. What remains unanswered and why it matters

Absent from the sources supplied here is a complete, published ERO basic training syllabus extract that lists the specific conflict management curricula, learning objectives, time allocation, and practical exercises that would demonstrate the depth of de‑escalation training ^{[5] [6]}, and that gap matters because policy debates and public scrutiny hinge on whether recruits are being taught practical verbal and tactical de‑escalation skills or primarily legal frameworks for use of force ^{[4] [3]}; uncovering the exact syllabus language would require direct release of those course documents from FLETC or ICE or access to the syllabi linked in the training catalog entries ^{[5] [2]}.