Who Oversees Conditions at Eagle Pass Detention Facility: Audits, Accreditation, and Board Oversight

GEO describes several overlapping ways conditions are monitored at Eagle Pass. At the company level, each facility goes through annual GEO corporate audits as part of a broader quality control program. Facilities are also subject to audits by government agencies and third-party inspections. In short, oversight isn't limited to one internal review - there are recurring checks from both inside the company and outside entities.

Beyond audits and inspections, GEO points to specific standards and accreditation frameworks as benchmarks. One is American Correctional Association (ACA) accreditation, which sets expectations for how facilities are run. GEO also references Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) compliance and certification, focused on preventing, detecting, and responding to sexual abuse in confinement settings. For Immigration Processing Centers, GEO references the DHS Performance-Based National Detention Standards - a framework covering day-to-day operations, treatment of people in custody, and required services and protections. These references don't tell you what a particular inspection found at Eagle Pass, but they show the categories of rules and review structures GEO says it operates under.

• ✓ PREA-related expectations often focus on preventing sexual abuse, staff training, safe reporting options, and how allegations are handled
• ✓ DHS Performance-Based National Detention Standards commonly address areas like safety practices, detainee treatment, and core services such as medical care
• ✓ ACA-style accreditation frameworks typically center on operational standards for running a detention or correctional facility

GEO also describes oversight at the highest corporate level. According to the company, its Board of Directors and the Board's Human Rights Committee oversee implementation and effectiveness of GEO's human rights policy across facilities like Eagle Pass. The Board and Human Rights Committee review that policy annually. For families, the key takeaway: GEO frames human-rights-related oversight as something reviewed not just locally, but at the board level too.

Knowing what GEO says is in place can help you be more specific when raising a concern. If something feels unsafe or wrong, you're not limited to describing the problem - you can also ask how it fits into the oversight systems GEO references: annual corporate audits, government agency audits, and third-party inspections. The same goes for standards like ACA-based accreditation guidelines, PREA compliance, and (for Immigration Processing Centers) the DHS Performance-Based National Detention Standards. It helps to separate two tracks: audits and inspections versus complaints and grievances. GEO states that formal complaints are promptly investigated, and individuals have access to grievance mechanisms through government agency partners and other oversight resources. If you're advocating for someone inside, that grievance access matters - it's one of the direct ways issues are supposed to surface. One caution: the information here comes from GEO's corporate-level policy statements. It describes oversight structures in general but doesn't include Eagle Pass–specific audit results, inspection findings, or current accreditation outcomes.

1. Write down the issue clearly - dates, times, names (if known), and what happened; this makes any complaint or grievance easier to investigate.
2. Match the concern to the right framework - for example, a sexual-safety concern aligns with PREA-related expectations, while broader conditions may relate to DHS detention standards (for Immigration Processing Centers) or other operational standards GEO references.
3. Use the grievance and oversight channels available to the person inside - GEO states individuals have access to grievance mechanisms through government agency partners and other oversight resources.
4. Ask focused questions - for example, whether the issue was addressed through an inspection, audit review, or a formal complaint process, rather than asking generally if the facility is “being monitored.”