49 Deficiencies. Determination: Passed. Who Is Watching ICE? — Is America Better Yet?

Camp East Montana is a federal immigration detention facility built on U.S. Army Fort Bliss in El Paso, Texas.

It opened in August 2025. By April 2026, the U.S. Government Accountability Office described it as ICE's largest detention facility, with capacity for about 5,000 people.

People held there are in federal immigration custody. They depend on ICE and its contractors for medical care, food, safety, access to basic services and many of the conditions of daily life.

They cannot simply walk away when one of those systems fails.

That is why what happened to Geraldo Lunas Campos matters.

Lunas Campos was 55 years old when he died inside Camp East Montana on January 3, 2026.

Records reviewed by ProPublica and The Texas Tribune described a man struggling with his mental health and frustrated about medication. He had previously harmed himself and had been found with a sheet around his neck.

He became unresponsive during an encounter with guards.

The El Paso County Medical Examiner later determined that the cause of death was asphyxia from compression of his neck and torso and classified the manner of death as homicide.

ICE has said staff were responding after Lunas Campos attempted to harm himself. Witness accounts have differed from the government's description.

Five weeks after his death, ICE inspectors arrived.

What they found raises a question much larger than one man's death.

49 deficiencies identified.

Determination: PASSED.

What does passing mean?

ICE's Office of Detention Oversight, part of the agency's Office of Professional Responsibility, inspected Camp East Montana from February 10 through February 12, 2026.

The inspection covered 24 detention standards.

The facility complied with 15.

Inspectors documented 49 deficiencies across the remaining nine standards.

ICE defines a deficiency as a violation of detention standards, policies or operational procedures.

Among the findings:

22 involved use of force and restraints.

11 involved facility security and control.

Five involved medical care.

Three were classified as priority-component deficiencies.

POGO later reported that Camp East Montana nevertheless received an “Acceptable/Adequate” rating.

In plain language:

49 deficiencies identified.

Determination: PASSED.

But deficiencies are not simply numbers on an inspection sheet.

People live behind them.

What does a use-of-force deficiency mean to the person being restrained?

The inspection found repeated failures involving what should happen during and after force is used against a detained person.

Inspectors found files with no documentation showing that staff immediately sought help from mental-health or medical personnel after gaining physical control of detained people.

They found cases where medical personnel did not document examinations or treatment after force.

They found files where the facility had not forwarded required use-of-force documentation to ICE for review.

They found deficiencies involving after-action reports.

And they found failures involving the review of video recordings, including whether recordings provided continuous coverage and whether apparently missing sequences were investigated.

Those can sound like paperwork problems.

They are not merely paperwork to the person on the floor.

After force is used, a medical examination can document injuries.

Video can help determine what actually occurred.

Witness memoranda can preserve accounts while memories are fresh.

An after-action review is supposed to determine whether staff followed required procedures.

When those safeguards fail, the record of what happened can fail with them.

What exactly happened in those force cases?

The inspection tells us that the deficiencies existed.

It does not, by itself, give the public the complete story of every person subjected to force.

Who was restrained?

Was anyone injured?

What type of force was used?

Which staff members were involved?

Was every incident recorded?

Was the recording preserved?

Was the person examined afterward?

Did investigators determine that policy was followed?

Was anyone disciplined?

Is America Better Yet? has tried to locate the underlying records needed to answer those questions.

We located the inspection report.

We have not located the complete underlying use-of-force incident files, all associated recordings, post-force medical examinations, investigative findings or disciplinary outcomes necessary to reconstruct every incident.

That does not mean those records do not exist.

It means we cannot responsibly tell you what they show.

We will keep looking. That's our job.

Behind every finding involving force or restraints was a human being against whom that force was used.

The public deserves to know what happened to that person.

What happens when a suicide safeguard becomes a paperwork failure?

The inspection found another deficiency that deserves to be read as more than administrative language.

Inspectors reviewed logs for people housed in the medical unit and found that staff did not accurately document required checks intended to prevent significant self-harm and suicide.

Consider what that means from inside a room.

A required check is supposed to mean that another person actually looks.

That someone notices if you are in distress.

That someone responds if you are hurting yourself.

The inspection finding does not establish that a missed or inaccurately recorded check caused a particular injury or death.

But it does establish that a safeguard intended to protect people at risk of self-harm was not being documented as required.

For the person depending on that safeguard, the distinction between a real check and a check that exists only on paper can be enormous.

A detention center calling 911 again and again

Another record was accumulating outside ICE.

The 911 system.

The Associated Press examined emergency calls from Camp East Montana during the facility's first months and found staff calling emergency services at a rate approaching one call a day.

The calls described seizures, assaults, suicidal behavior, pregnancy-related pain and other medical emergencies.

At least 20 reported incidents involved seizures, some involving head injuries.

One man said he had been kicked in the ear and ribs.

Another reported that he could not move his left eye after an assault.

A woman who was 12 weeks pregnant was experiencing intense pain. The emergency-call record indicated that she had not received prenatal care before reaching Camp East Montana.

Other calls involved people threatening or attempting suicide.

In one episode described in the calls, medical workers disagreed over whether a suicidal person should return to detention or be taken to an emergency room before realizing they were discussing two different patients.

Those calls do not prove that the 49 inspection deficiencies caused those emergencies.

They show what the medical and mental-health systems inside this detention center were being asked to handle.

So when an inspection says medical-care deficiency, another question should follow:

Who was waiting for that care?

What does a medical deficiency mean to someone who cannot leave?

One of the medical findings involved tuberculosis.

Inspectors found that a detained person with symptoms suggestive of pulmonary tuberculosis was not housed in an airborne-infection isolation room with negative-pressure ventilation, as the applicable standard required.

That is not simply a technical ventilation rule.

Tuberculosis can spread through the air.

The inspection does not establish that another person became infected because of this deficiency.

It establishes that a safeguard intended to reduce exposure to a potentially serious infectious disease was not followed in the case inspectors reviewed.

A delayed medical response can mean waiting while pain worsens.

A missed medication can mean wondering whether another dose will arrive.

An inadequate infectious-disease procedure can mean wondering whether the person sleeping nearby poses a risk you cannot escape.

A failure involving suicide prevention can mean depending on an observation system inspectors have already found deficient.

These are systems designed to protect human beings who cannot simply seek care somewhere else.

49 deficiencies identified.

Determination: PASSED.

So what did passing mean to the people sleeping inside?

Another federal watchdog found serious problems

ICE's inspection was not the only government examination of Camp East Montana.

The U.S. Government Accountability Office, Congress's nonpartisan investigative arm, conducted its own audit.

GAO found that the facility opened in August 2025 without meeting key detention standards.

ICE had not conducted the inspection required by its own policy before people were housed there.

The facility initially lacked perimeter security cameras.

It lacked outdoor recreation space.

It lacked appropriate space for attorney and family visitation.

After opening, ICE identified additional problems involving medical services, tuberculosis screening, unsanitary conditions and other operations.

A loaded firearm was lost inside the facility.

GAO said these problems posed serious risks to both detained people and staff.

Think about those findings from inside.

“Outdoor recreation” is not merely an inspection category if you are confined day after day.

“Attorney visitation” is not administrative paperwork when communication with a lawyer may affect whether you remain in the United States.

“Medical services” are not a performance metric when you are sick.

The government calls them standards because people are supposed to be able to depend on them.

ICE found problems it could not easily penalize

GAO found another weakness.

The original Camp East Montana contract lacked a Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan.

That kind of plan tells the government how contractor performance will be monitored, how deficiencies will be documented and how they will be addressed.

ICE and Army officials told GAO the plan was omitted because of the accelerated schedule used to open the facility.

Without meaningful performance measures and the surveillance plan, ICE contracting officials told GAO they experienced major difficulties overseeing the contractor.

They also told GAO they could not apply financial penalties for identified deficiencies.

That creates another question for the taxpayers paying for the facility.

If the government identifies serious failures but lacks an effective mechanism for financially penalizing the contractor:

What happens next?

A report?

A recommendation?

Another inspection?

For the person inside, the question is simpler:

Did anything actually change?

The grading problem extends beyond Texas

The Project On Government Oversight, working with American University's Investigative Reporting Workshop, analyzed 500 initial ICE Office of Detention Oversight reports covering 174 facilities from fiscal year 2022 through July 23, 2026.

POGO found increasingly favorable grades.

As of July 23, about 74% of fiscal year 2026 inspections had resulted in ICE's highest rating, “Superior.”

POGO also found that no facility dedicated exclusively to ICE detention failed an inspection during the period it examined.

Camp East Montana was among the facilities with the largest numbers of deficiencies while still passing.

The analysis also found that ICE was using six different detention-standard frameworks in 2026.

That makes comparisons harder.

It makes the grading methodology more important.

And the relationship between documented deficiencies and final ratings remains difficult for the public to evaluate.

So the question persists:

How many deficiencies does an ICE detention facility need before it fails?

One detained woman watched a facility change when inspectors came

The statistics become easier to understand through Leqaa Kordia.

Kordia spent months detained at the Prairieland Detention Facility in Texas.

She told POGO that conditions changed before inspectors arrived.

She recalled fresh paint, different food and a new water cooler.

Kordia also described medical problems of her own. She said a severe fever worsened after her requests for care were ignored and that she ultimately suffered a seizure and was taken to a hospital.

She told inspectors about concerns involving medical care, water quality and religious accommodations.

The subsequent inspection gave Prairieland a “Superior” rating and reported no violations of detention standards.

Kordia's account is her experience. It does not independently prove that inspectors were deliberately misled.

But it illustrates something an inspection report cannot necessarily capture.

Inspectors see a facility while they are there.

The people detained inside experience it before the inspectors arrive, after they leave and every night in between.

What happens when outside inspectors want a closer look?

Federal inspectors are not the only officials who have raised concerns about immigration detention.

At Delaney Hall in Newark, New Jersey, state health inspectors attempted to conduct a complete health inspection.

New Jersey officials said they were prevented from examining crucial areas, including the medical unit, sleeping areas, bathing and toilet areas, and ventilation systems.

The state sued the private operator, The GEO Group, seeking full access.

When inspectors returned in June, New Jersey said they again were allowed only a limited tour rather than the full inspection they sought.

At the Aurora ICE detention facility in Colorado, another public-health dispute developed after a confirmed tuberculosis case.

Colorado health officials sought medical information, possible-contact information and records showing where detained people had been transferred or released.

When the state said GEO had not provided the information necessary for its investigation, Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser sued on August 19 to enforce a public-health order.

Those disputes do not establish that every allegation about either facility is true.

They establish something narrower:

Outside public-health authorities said they could not obtain the access or information they believed was necessary to determine whether people were safe.

The people inside remained inside while those disputes continued.

And outside oversight may become harder

The disputes in New Jersey and Colorado may point to a larger problem.

Recent reporting indicates that ICE is pursuing detention arrangements that could make state and local oversight more difficult, including possible federal ownership of privately operated facilities and contract language asserting that stricter state or local requirements do not apply.

That matters because ICE is expanding detention capacity at the same time states are fighting for access to facilities, medical records and public-health information.

If ICE's own inspection system can give a passing grade to a facility with 49 documented deficiencies, reducing independent outside oversight raises an obvious question: Who is left to check ICE's work?

The precise legal reach of those arrangements remains disputed, and IABY has not yet independently obtained all of the underlying contract language.

We are looking for it.

A son died while his mother waited for answers

At Delaney Hall, questions about medical care became deeply personal for Maria Cornejo.

Her son, Edwin Lopez-Cornejo, was held there.

She said that during their final conversation on July 31, Edwin told her that he felt sick and that part of his face and his right hand had gone numb.

He died the following day after a medical emergency.

ICE says Edwin received proper medical care and prescribed medication.

His mother believes he was not receiving medication he needed.

Neither account becomes established fact simply because one came from the government and the other from his family.

The records should answer the question.

But the complete medical chart, medication-administration record, emergency-response record and other evidence needed to resolve that conflict were not publicly available in the record reviewed by IABY.

That is what incomplete transparency looks like from the outside.

From inside a family, it looks like a mother waiting to learn what happened to her son.

Who investigates ICE when ICE uses force?

The accountability question does not stop at detention-center walls.

It follows immigration officers into the field.

GAO examined ICE's system for reviewing uses of force.

According to ICE officials interviewed by GAO, an officer's supervisor generally determines whether the force complied with policy. A second level of the chain of command reviews that determination.

Potential misconduct can be referred to ICE's Office of Professional Responsibility.

An ICE analytical unit also reviews force reports and can refer possible violations to OPR.

If OPR determines that an officer violated policy, the matter can return to the officer's local office and chain of command to address the deficiencies.

That means significant portions of ICE's administrative accountability process occur inside ICE itself.

That does not mean ICE is always the only investigator.

Potential crimes can involve outside authorities, including inspectors general, the FBI, Justice Department investigators, state prosecutors or other agencies depending on the case.

But an internal policy review and an independent criminal investigation are different processes.

The public needs to know which occurred, what each found and what happened afterward.

José went toward a bus stop. He ended up in a hospital.

On August 11, José Mejía Hernandez, 45, encountered ICE officers in Arlington, Virginia.

His lawyers say men approached him from unmarked vehicles and that Mejía ran because he did not know who they were.

Mejía says being struck with a Taser is the last thing he remembers before losing memory of the encounter.

He later received hospital treatment.

Medical records reviewed by news organizations documented a traumatic brain injury and brain bleeding.

DHS confirmed that ICE officers stopped Mejía and used force. The department said the force was necessary after he attempted to flee and disputed parts of Mejía's account.

Arlington Commonwealth's Attorney Parisa Dehghani-Tafti called for an immediate investigation.

The public record still leaves the central question unresolved:

How did José Mejía Hernandez suffer those injuries?

Where are the complete officer reports?

What recordings exist?

What does the force review show?

What did witnesses see?

What did investigators conclude?

And if ICE conducts an internal investigation:

Will the public be allowed to see the result?

Sometimes outside investigators reach a different conclusion

In Minnesota, ICE agent Christian Castro faces criminal charges arising from a January enforcement operation.

Hennepin County prosecutors allege that Castro fired through the door of an occupied Minneapolis home and struck Julio Cesar Sosa-Celis in the leg.

Prosecutors also accuse Castro of falsely reporting the encounter.

Castro is presumed innocent unless proven guilty.

State prosecutors, rather than ICE alone, brought the criminal case.

Castro was subsequently arrested in Texas.

Minnesota later went to federal court seeking to compel his extradition to stand trial.

Whatever the eventual outcome, the case illustrates the distinction:

Internal agency review and independent criminal accountability are not the same thing.

A mother called 911 to save her son

On May 20, Jessica Neal called 911 in Memphis because her 25-year-old son, Jonah Neal, was experiencing a mental-health crisis and threatening suicide.

Federal agents arrived.

An agent with Homeland Security Investigations, a component of ICE, shot Neal inside the home.

Neal died.

Months later, his mother and the family's attorney were allowed to view body-camera footage from another agent.

The attorney says the footage does not show a threat that justified deadly force.

That is the attorney's interpretation, not an official finding.

The Tennessee Bureau of Investigation says its investigation remains open.

The complete footage has not been publicly released.

State authorities also have not publicly identified the agent who fired in the reporting reviewed by IABY or said whether that agent remains on duty.

Again, a family waits.

Not for a slogan.

Not for an assurance.

For evidence.

Inspect. Report. Recommend. Repeat.

The pattern appears repeatedly.

Inspectors identify deficiencies.

Reports are written.

Corrective actions are recommended.

Another inspection occurs.

Another investigation begins.

Sometimes lawmakers propose legislation.

Sometimes prosecutors intervene.

Sometimes courts intervene.

Meanwhile, the people affected by the system cannot suspend their lives while government accountability catches up.

They still sleep in the detention center tonight.

They still need medicine tonight.

Someone in a mental-health crisis still needs another human being to check the room tonight.

Someone subjected to force still needs injuries documented tonight.

A family whose relative has died still wants answers tonight.

Government oversight can take months or years.

Human vulnerability operates in real time.

The public pays for every part of this

The American public pays for these facilities.

You pay the contractors.

You pay the officers.

You pay the inspectors.

You pay for the investigations.

You pay when one government agency must investigate another.

That creates a reasonable expectation.

When inspectors identify a deficiency, was it fixed?

When someone is injured, what happened?

When an officer fires a weapon, was the force justified?

When someone dies, did the government follow its own standards?

When misconduct is substantiated, was anyone disciplined?

When a contractor violates requirements, were there consequences?

And when ICE says things are improving:

What independent evidence demonstrates that improvement?

What the evidence does and does not show

Nothing in the records reviewed for this article establishes that every ICE detention facility is unsafe.

Nothing establishes that every ICE officer uses improper force.

Nothing establishes that every internal ICE investigation is unreliable.

And a documented deficiency does not prove that it caused a particular injury or death.

Those distinctions matter.

But another set of facts matters just as much.

ICE inspectors documented 49 deficiencies at Camp East Montana.

The facility passed.

GAO independently found that Camp East Montana opened without meeting important standards and without the inspection ICE policy required before people were housed there.

Emergency records document repeated medical and mental-health crises.

Outside public-health officials have fought for access to other detention facilities and records.

State prosecutors have investigated federal immigration officers.

Families continue seeking answers after serious injuries and deaths.

And the public still cannot easily trace every serious use-of-force case from incident, to investigation, to finding, to consequence.

That is an accountability system worth investigating.

The question behind every number

The next time an inspection says five medical-care deficiencies, ask:

Who needed medical care?

When it says 22 use-of-force and restraint deficiencies, ask:

Who was restrained?

Was anyone hurt?

Was the person examined afterward?

Was the encounter recorded?

Was the recording preserved?

When a suicide-prevention check is not properly documented, ask:

Who was depending on that check?

When an attorney-visitation requirement is not met, ask:

Whose case depended on that attorney?

When a grievance is not handled properly, ask:

Who asked for help?

And after the inspection is finished, ask the simplest question:

Did anyone verify that the problem was fixed?

Because ultimately this investigation is not about 49 deficiencies.

It is about the people who had to live with them.

49 deficiencies identified.

Determination: PASSED.

And the people inside stayed inside.

What IABY is still seeking

Is America Better Yet? will continue looking for the underlying Camp East Montana use-of-force incident records, post-force medical examinations, recordings and preservation records, after-action reviews, corrective-action records, ICE's grading worksheet or rubric, follow-up inspection records, contractor sanctions or waivers, and records showing whether individual deficiencies were corrected.

We will also continue tracking serious ICE and HSI force cases for final investigative findings, officer duty status, disciplinary decisions and prosecutorial outcomes.

Where records are missing, we will say they are missing.

Where agencies do not respond, we will document that.

Where accounts conflict, we will show you the conflict.

Where the evidence does not support a conclusion, we will not manufacture one.

We will keep looking. We will keep digging until the public record gives us the answers, or until we can document precisely where that record stops. That's what forensic journalism requires.

Sources

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Office of Professional Responsibility, Office of Detention Oversight. ERO El Paso Camp East Montana, Inspection 2026-001-098. February 10-12, 2026.

U.S. Government Accountability Office. Immigration Detention: Waste and Performance Issues at Camp East Montana Provide Valuable Lessons for Future Facilities. GAO-26-108886. June 9, 2026.

Project On Government Oversight / Investigative Reporting Workshop. Isabel Del Mastro and René Kladzyk. Inside ICE's Broken System for Inspecting Detention Facilities. August 18, 2026.

Associated Press. Ryan J. Foley, Michael Biesecker and Morgan Lee. Investigation of emergency calls and conditions at Camp East Montana. March 6, 2026.

ProPublica / The Texas Tribune. Reporting on Geraldo Lunas Campos, medical and mental-health care, and Camp East Montana. July 2026.

El Paso County Medical Examiner. Autopsy report for Geraldo Lunas Campos, finalized January 21, 2026.

U.S. Government Accountability Office. Law Enforcement: DHS Should Strengthen Use of Force Data Collection and Analysis. GAO-23-105927.

State of New Jersey, Department of Health and Office of the Attorney General. Delaney Hall inspection-access statements and litigation materials, May-June 2026.

Colorado Attorney General. Public-health enforcement action concerning the tuberculosis investigation at the Aurora ICE detention facility. August 19, 2026.

Arlington County Commonwealth's Attorney. Statement calling for investigation after José Mejía Hernandez was seriously injured during an ICE encounter. August 18, 2026.

Minnesota Attorney General and Hennepin County Attorney. Records concerning the Christian Castro prosecution and extradition proceedings.

NPR. Juliana Kim. Reporting on the Jonah Neal shooting, family review of body-camera footage and continuing Tennessee investigation. August 23, 2026.

IABY Delaney Hall evidence file. Edwin Lopez-Cornejo medical emergency, death and oversight record.

IABY national ICE medical-care and oversight evidence file. Medical care, suicide prevention, emergency response, record integrity and detention oversight.

Method and transparency note

Is America Better Yet? compared ICE inspection findings with federal watchdog reports, emergency records, state and local government materials, court and prosecutorial records, investigative reporting and previously preserved IABY evidence.

A finding at one facility is not treated as proof of conditions at another.

A documented deficiency is not treated as proof that it caused an injury or death.

Allegations are identified as allegations.

Criminal charges are not treated as convictions.

Where IABY could not locate underlying incident records, investigative findings, disciplinary outcomes or other evidence, we say so rather than infer what those records contain.

This is a living investigation. New primary records, corrections and agency responses will be incorporated as they become available.

AI tools assisted with research organization, drafting, editing and verification. AI-generated material was not treated as evidence. Consequential factual claims were checked against identified records and reporting.

A note of thanks

I want to take a moment to thank the people and tools that have helped me build Is America Better Yet?

That includes the individuals who work closely with me, ChatGPT, and the many search engines and research tools I have relied on over the years.

They have helped with research, fact-checking, source identification, organization, and bringing new technology into this virtual newsroom.

I could not have done this work alone. Thank you.

I write for you.

— Roberto

isamericabetteryet.org

© Roberto Zapatero. All Rights Reserved.