What organizations in Massachusetts receive state or private funds to assist undocumented immigrants, and did Healey support them?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Massachusetts has directed state and federal dollars and private donations to a mix of refugee resettlement agencies, legal-service nonprofits and a new Immigrant Assistance Services (IAS) program; the Healey-Driscoll administration explicitly funded the IAS with $1.75 million and backed contracts and partnerships with resettlement agencies to help newly arriving families [1] [2]. The administration also declared a state of emergency, sought federal funding including nearly $2 million from FEMA, and promoted private relief efforts such as the Massachusetts Migrant Families Relief Fund coordinated by United Way [3] [4] [5].
1. Who receives state grants: resettlement agencies and MIRA’s IAS
The Healey administration awarded $1.75 million to create the Immigrant Assistance Services (IAS) program, administered in partnership with the Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition (MIRA) to supply legal help, case management and referrals for newly arrived families in emergency-assistance (EA) shelters [1] [6]. Separately, the administration announced state contracts and partnership funding for a group of long-standing resettlement agencies — including Ascentria Community Services, Catholic Charitable Bureau of the Archdiocese of Boston, Jewish Family Services (MetroWest and Western Massachusetts), Organization for Refugee and Immigrant Success (ORIS), Refugee and Immigrant Assistance Center (RIAC), the Catholic Charities Agency of Springfield, and the International Institute of New England — to provide rehousing, employment search and social-service connections for new arrivals [2].
2. Federal and private money layered on top of state action
Beyond state appropriations, Healey’s administration pursued federal aid and accepted FEMA shelter funds — roughly $1.9 million was announced to support migrant housing in coordination with Boston’s administration — and the administration publicly urged more federal funding and changes in work authorization processes [4] [7]. Private philanthropy also played a role: the United Way’s Massachusetts Migrant Families Relief Fund pooled donations from foundations and corporations to support nonprofits and direct aid for immigrants [5].
3. Legal and social services named in public resource lists
State and municipal resource pages and nonprofit hubs identify organizations providing legal and social services to immigrants — for example, MIRA serves as an information hub and operates programs for citizenship, “know your rights” materials, ESOL and casework [8] [9]. Local government resource pages point to legal-service groups such as Lawyers for Civil Rights and Northeast Legal Aid as providers immigrants can contact for free or low-cost civil and immigration-related legal help [10] [11].
4. Did Governor Healey “support” these organizations?
Yes. The administration’s public statements and press releases show active support: Healey signed the budget that included funding for the resettlement partnerships, announced and praised the $1.75 million IAS award to MIRA, celebrated MIRA events at the State House, and repeatedly framed state action as partnering with nonprofits to expand shelter, legal services, and rehousing for new arrivals [1] [2] [12]. The administration also sent officials to the southern border and publicly lobbied for federal policy changes to speed work authorizations and secure funding, signaling policy as well as fiscal support [13] [7].
5. Points of contention and political framing
Critics and partisan outlets frame Healey’s actions as protecting or subsidizing “illegal migrants” and emphasize fiscal burdens; for example, some commentary claims costs exceed $1 billion annually or accuses the governor of shielding migrants from federal enforcement [14]. The administration frames its moves as emergency response and humanitarian necessity — invoking Massachusetts’s right-to-shelter law and large shelter demands — and stresses the need for federal fixes to work authorization and funding to reduce state burdens [15] [3]. Both framings are present in the record [3] [14].
6. What reporting does not show (limitations)
Available sources document named resettlement agencies, the IAS award, FEMA and United Way funding, and references to legal-service providers, but do not provide a comprehensive, line-item list of every state or private grant to every immigrant-serving organization across Massachusetts — nor do the provided sources enumerate exact totals paid to each nonprofit beyond the cited grants and FEMA award (available sources do not mention a full, itemized accounting of every recipient beyond the agencies named in these announcements) [1] [2] [4] [5].
7. Bottom line for readers
Massachusetts used state appropriations (including the $1.75M IAS award), coordinated federal FEMA aid, and leveraged private philanthropy to support resettlement agencies, legal-service nonprofits and MIRA as a hub; Governor Healey publicly backed and authorized those actions and repeatedly lobbied for federal help to reduce state costs [1] [2] [4] [5]. Reporting shows clear state endorsement and funding for specific agencies named in the administration’s announcements, while broader fiscal and political debates about costs and enforcement remain contested in partisan commentary [14] [3].