Review of the Immigration Control
Officer Network – Final Report
4.0 Management Response and Action Plan (2/12)
| Recommendation / Management Response | Action Plan | Office of Primary Interest | Planned Implementation Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2. A generic ICO job description should be developed, along the lines set out in this report, to include a baseline percentage of the ICO’s dedication to this function. The proposed management framework must hold the program manager or ICO accountable for any deviation from the baseline percentage. Once the job description is approved, a communication strategy should be developed to ensure that all stakeholders are informed of and understand the operating principle and job description of the ICO.
Management agrees in principle that a generic ICO job description
should be developed that is acceptable to all three branches—the
Enforcement Branch, IR and the Case Management Branch—and
that program managers should be held accountable for meeting the
agreed-on objectives (see recommendations 7 and 8).
|
a) Intelligence and Interdiction (SEZ) will
produce a generic ICO job description for distribution by April 3, 2002, to ICOs, RID and BCD. |
SED in consultation with RID and BCD | April 3, 2002 |
| b) The group will meet April 25, 2002, to discuss and finalize a generic ICO job description. | April 25, 2002 | ||
| c) The group will report back to senior management by May 25, 2002, to recommend adoption of the finalized generic ICO job description. | May 25, 2002 | ||
| d) After the generic ICO job description is adopted, the group will
prepare a communication strategy with key messages to ensure all stakeholders
are informed.
The group determined that recommendations 2 (ICO roles and responsibilities), 3 (de facto ICOs), and 4 (organized crime responsibilities) were linked in that all three items demand a statement of duties. The mechanism for accountability of program managers and ICOs for delivery of the Enforcement Program abroad will be elaborated under recommendation 7 (planning and reporting). The group recognized that agreement on the job description is a contentious issue. Implementation of the report recommendations that routine immigrant and non immigrant processing should not be part of the ICO job description (that is, not part of the regular case load), and that no routine or centralized security screening should be tasked to the ICO or ICO unit, will be problematic in the short term. The group recognized the need for implementation of recommendation 6 (ICO assignments - threat and risk assessment) to advance the discussion of departmental objectives and the specific enforcement and organized crime requirements for all missions. SEZ highlighted the need to establish a mechanism for consultation and consensus on reallocation of ICOs to non-ICO duties that takes into account overall departmental objectives in a given location. This item should be included in the discussion of the management framework. |
- Date Modified:
