Issuu

2026 WCAPS En Voz Alta

BEYOND THE BORDER: REINTEGRATION CHALLENGES FOR WOMEN RETURNING TO MEXICO

Meet the En Voz Alta (EVA) Researchers

Researcher

Gabriela Susoui

Marcela Ventura

Researcher

Margaret Lyons Hill

Researcher

Maria S. Ortiz-Urdaneta

Meet the Supporting EVA Community

Program Officer

EVA Senior Advisor

Jada Quinland

Deyanira Murga

Editor

Media and Communications Specialist

Dr. Tahina Montoya

Lourdes Sanchez 3

Foreword Every year, tens of thousands of Mexican nationals are forcibly returned to Mexico from the United States. The migration experiences that follow, their facilitation and their obstruction, are not merely logistical matters. At their heart, they are tests of our capacity to protect human dignity, advance gender justice, and promote sustainable peace. This timely report on Mexican deportees and gendered reintegration lays bare both the failings of current policies toward returning migrants, especially women, and the policy changes needed to remedy them. As is reported in the report, although Mexico’s reintegración or reintegration framework and attendant Mexico Te Abrazaprogram recognize that deportees need assistance reintegrating into Mexican society, too many initiatives stop at providing short‑term economic and social services. They fail to grapple with the reality that women face distinct challenges upon return to Mexico, including higher rates of insecurity and violence, exploitative employment, and restricted access to support services, justice, and dignified livelihoods. Addressing these gendered drivers of harm is essential to building effective reintegration policies. WCAPS is honored to have worked with the talented group of young women researchers at George Washington University who contributed to this report. In gathering statistics and centering the voices of women returned migrants through fieldwork in Mexico, they have brought a gender‑aware and security‑oriented perspective to an issue that affects hundreds of thousands of women and families. At WCAPS, we know that women of color and other marginalized groups must be included in security and peacebuilding solutions if those solutions are to be effective for everyone. This report is living proof of that. It is our hope that the policymakers, practitioners, and advocates who have the power to change migrant return experiences on both sides of the U.S.–Mexico border will read it with urgency and act on its recommendations to better protect the security and livelihoods of women migrants. Ambassador Bonnie Jenkins WCAPS Founder and Executive Director

Table of Contents Glossary Terms

I. Executive Summary

II. Overview and Background

Current Reintegration Policies in Mexico Necessity for Policy Change Client and Project Goals Recent Statistical Findings on Deported Women from Mexico Reintegration Infrastructure and Immediate Assistance for Deportees Social Welfare Programs and Reintegration Support Role of Non-Governmental Organizations Gender-Based Violence and Structural Vulnerabilities Research Gaps

III. Methodology

IV. Key Findings

Institutional & Social Barriers to Reintegration Impact of Intersectional Identities on the Deportation and Reintegration Process Review of the Literature V. Policy Options

1. Improving Mexico te Abraza 2. Holistic Program - After Mexico te Abraza

VI. Recommendations

VII. Implementation

VIII. Conclusion

IX. Endnotes

X. Bibliography

Post-Deportation and Security Considerations for Deported Women: A Gender-Sensitive Analysis of Reintegration Policies in Mexico

The George Washington University Elliott School of International Affairs Margaret Lyons Hill Maria S. Ortiz-Urdaneta Gabrielle Susoiu Marcela Ventura Professor Jennifer Fox May 1st, 2025

Glossary of Terms deportation (removal): The formal process by which a non-citizen is expelled from a country, typically by government authorities, due to violations of immigration law. self-deportation (voluntary return): The process by which an individual chooses to return to their country of origin without formal removal proceedings, often due to legal, economic, or social pressures. reintegration: The process through which returned migrants re-establish their lives in their country of origin, including economic, social, and cultural adaptation. reintegration program(s): Governmental or non-governmental initiative(s) designed to support returnees through services such as housing assistance, employment placement, healthcare access, and social support. gender: a social and societal construct that guides behaviors, attributes, and roles; usually associated with male or female, commonly referred to as being a spectrum. border reception centers: Facilities located in border cities that provide immediate, short-term assistance to deportees upon arrival, including shelter, food, medical care, and administrative support. IMSS Bienestar (Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social): Mexican public healthcare program that provides free or low-cost medical services to individuals without formal social security coverage, including vulnerable populations such as deportees. Bienestar Paisano Card: Form of financial assistance provided to deportees upon return, offering a small monetary stipend to cover immediate expenses during the initial reintegration period. México te Abraza: Mexican government initiative that coordinates services for returning migrants, including access to social programs, employment support, and limited gendersensitive services.

gender-sensitive approach: Policy or program design that recognizes and addresses the different needs, experiences, and vulnerabilities of individuals based on gender. gender-based violence (GBV): Violence directed at an individual based on their gender, including physical, sexual, psychological, and economic harm. violence against women: the different types of abuse (including but not limited to) physical, psychological, and sexual faced by women; often used interchangeably with GBV. femicide: The gender-motivated killing of women, often associated with systemic violence, discrimination, and impunity. intersectionality: Analytical framework that examines how overlapping social identities (such as gender, race, class, and migration status) contribute to unique experiences of discrimination and vulnerability. non-governmental organization (NGO): Independent, non-profit organization that operates outside of government structures and often provides services, advocacy, or humanitarian support. service provider: Individual or organization that delivers direct assistance to deportees or migrants, such as legal aid, shelter, healthcare, or counseling. structural barrier(s): Systemic obstacles such as bureaucracy, lack of information, or limited institutional capacity that prevent individuals from accessing services or opportunities. machismo: Cultural concept associated with traditional male dominance and rigid gender roles, often linked to gender inequality and the normalization of violence against women. social welfare program(s): Government initiatives designed to provide financial, educational, or social support to vulnerable populations, including pensions, scholarships, and housing assistance. UTI(s): urinary tract infection(s). Institute for Women in Migration (IMUMI): a Mexican civil society organization dedicated to the rights and enjoyment of migrant women, children, and families. Somos Mexicanos: Mexican program dedicated to dignified and beneficial returns to Mexico.

Executive Summary Migration enforcement policies in the United States have led to tens of thousands of

Mexican nationals being deported each year, creating ongoing challenges for Mexico’s reintegration system. While the Mexican government has implemented an initiative known as Mexico te Abraza which intends to assist deportees, existing reintegration policies often primarily focus on economic and social support and may not adequately address the genderspecific vulnerabilities faced by women after deportation. Female deportees frequently encounter additional risks upon returning to Mexico, including violence against women (GBV), insecurity, and barriers to accessing social services and employment. This project seeks to evaluate Mexico’s reintegration policies for deportees from the United States through a gender-sensitive and security-focused lens. By analyzing existing policy frameworks, statistical trends, and perspectives from individuals involved in reintegration processes, the study aims to identify gaps between policy design and the lived experiences of returnees. Particular attention is given to how current programs address the intersection of gender, security, and reintegration outcomes. This research was conducted in partnership with our client, Women of Color Advancing Peace, Security, and Conflict Transformation (WCAPS), a non-governmental organization (NGO) dedicated to platforming the voices of women of color, particularly in the fields of international affairs, peace, and security. Preliminary research suggested that many Mexican reintegration programs provide shortterm assistance, but lack long-term support mechanisms tailored to the unique needs of women. Additionally, research indicated that limited gender-focused programming and insufficient accessibility of services may hinder effective reintegration for female deportees. Despite this,

Mexico has begun taking steps to integrate gender perspectives into migration policy, presenting an opportunity to strengthen existing programs and collaboration. Through policy analysis and interviews with both returnees and service providers, this project generates policy options and recommendations that can improve reintegration policies and enhance security for women returning to Mexico. Based on the findings from our research, our first proposed policy option is the thorough improvement of the México te Abraza reintegration initiative, through the development of services such as the creation of designated safe spaces, provision of trauma-informed training to service providers, and the provision of essential items by centros de atención or care centers, and more. While the strength of this recommendation lies in humanizing the deportation and reintegration experience for deportees, r primary limitations include the need for additional personnel, creation of designated spaces to provide services, and increased funding to make these changes happen. Our second proposed policy is the creation of a program to work alongside México te Abraza that is more holistic in both scope and nature, through the development of services such as initial screenings for deportees at welcome/reception centers, shelters, and drop-in centers. The primary strength of this recommendation is how it directly targets the long term needs of returnees such as housing assistance, health support, workforce development and more, as well as aiding in the process of reintegrating socially, beyond the economic integration México te Abraza currently prioritizes. Its limitations are similar to our first proposed option, in that this recommendation requires a breadth of diverse funding, personnel trained in various specialties, and the creation of designated physical spaces in order for the provision of said services to occur.

Because both of these proposed options contain a variety of recommendations aimed at improving the overall reintegration experience for deportees, we recommend the implementation of both policy options. The first recommendation aims to improve the existing initiative, which is incredibly important as this will be the most feasible and straightforward option, while the second recommendation aims to expand the scope of implementation of reintegration services for deportees entering Mexico. This is because currently, México te Abraza’s services are only accessible to Mexican nationals who went through the formal deportation process in the United States. As the deportee population in Mexico that went through this process increases and continually includes people who self-deported (Henderson and Shorman 2026), forcefully returned, as well as deportees from other countries, we believe it is important to create a program that targets their necessities while covering the gaps left by México te Abraza. The findings from our research aim to support WCAPS, policymakers, civil society organizations, and international partners in researching and developing more inclusive and effective reintegration strategies. II. Overview and Background Migration enforcement policies after 2020 in the United States have led to a rise of Mexican nationals being deported each year, creating ongoing challenges for Mexico’s reintegration system. The Mexican government implemented the Mexico te Abraza initiative as a response to the 2025 changes in U.S. migration policy with the intent to assist deportees. However, its reintegration support primarily focuses on economic and social support and may not adequately address the gender-specific vulnerabilities faced by women after deportation. Female deportees frequently encounter additional risks upon returning to Mexico, including violence against women, insecurity, and barriers to accessing social services and employment.

This project aims to analyze Mexico’s existing reintegration policies for United States deportees through a gender-sensitive lens, with particular attention to how these policies address post-deportation security risks. In 2024, the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) reported over 80,000 removals of Mexican citizens, almost double the number removed the previous year.1 The current United States administration has also developed stricter immigration policies, such as the 2025 Protecting the American People Against Invasion Executive Order, which emphasizes expedited removals and expanded detention facilities.2 Additional aid cuts on behalf of the United States have also led to a decrease in external support for programs related to migrants' rights, with the United Nations’ refugee agency Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) closing four offices and laying off almost 200 employees in Mexico.3 These policies accelerate the rate of deportations and underline the urgency of examining the preparedness of the Mexican government to reintegrate deportees. Current Reintegration Policies in Mexico Mexico has one primary reintegration initiative for deportees called “México te Abraza,” which works in collaboration with a variety of the government’s existing social welfare programs and agencies. Based on discussions with the Institute for Women in Migration (IMUMI), the initiative is a combination of already established reintegration and repatriation initiatives, such as Somos Mexicanos, but with the inclusion of centers ready to assist those with a Mexican background arriving on deportation flights. While these initiatives have the goal of improving the overall lives of Mexicans, they only provide temporary relief that is primarily economic and social in nature.4 Only one México te Abraza collaborative initiative is women-focused, and it is

limited to the economic reintegration of women over sixty years of age.5 This narrow focus overlooks the diversity of deportees and fails to account for the gendered vulnerabilities and inequalities that they face such as machismo impacting how individuals are viewed in society, limited access to social resources, and gender gaps in the labor market. Need for Policy Change A recent ethnographic analysis, “Reinforcing, Negotiating and Resisting Gender Norms among Reunited Couples in Mexico: An Intersectional Critical Ethnography" found that policies failing to incorporate a holistic approach to reintegration can perpetuate inequality and damage social justice within the enforcement system, having negative implications for the sociopolitical conditions of deportees. As a result, public perception of these programs remains largely skeptical and cynical.6 A 2023 study from the Wilson Center supports these findings with migrants described reintegration programs as “poorly advertised and…difficult to access.”7 Additionally, returnees and service providers described the programs as focusing on short-term strategies rather than long-term reintegration frameworks. This leaves deportees without the proper institutional support needed after the traumatic experience of being deported and their navigation of a new life in a country that may feel foreign to them after their time abroad. In particular, female deportees returning to Mexico are more prone to extreme risks such as systemic and institutional barriers, insecurity, and violence against women. This is particularly alarming because one in every four killings of women in Mexico is classified as a femicide.8 In fact, in 2016 seven women were murdered every day in Mexico.9 This reality contributes to the community of female deportees being frequently targeted for ransom kidnappings, trafficking and face higher rates of sexual violence and assault.10

Without policies that examine and proactively respond to these conditions, the effectiveness of reintegration efforts can be undermined. This is why working alongside organizations such as Secretaria de las Mujeres - which coordinates national public policies to achieve better conditions for women in Mexico - and IMUMI is key to this research project. Both institutions emphasize the unique challenges faced by women while recognizing the many intersectional identities among female deportees in Mexico, though they are still limited in their efforts as well. Despite these challenges, Mexico’s reintegration policies are not static, and the government has demonstrated a growing willingness to adapt. This shift makes a more comprehensive approach more feasible than in previous years, and makes our research more essential as changes can be achieved sooner rather than later. For example, the Mexican government is currently attempting to apply a gender-sensitive approach to its migration policies, with its National Women’s Institute signing a collaborative agreement with the Institute for Mexicans Abroad. This partnership aims to strengthen support for vulnerable women’s communities and assist returning migrant women by mainstreaming a gender perspective to influence policy and draw attention to the specific security risks that migrant women face. By addressing these issues systematically, the state can mitigate further enforced inequities in the reintegration process.11 Client and Project Goals Our client for this Capstone project is Women of Color Advancing Peace, Security, and Conflict Transformation (WCAPS). WCAPS is dedicated to redefining traditional notions of national security by centering the perspectives and leadership of women of color globally.

Through this partnership, our project aligns with WCAPS’ broader mission by examining migration and reintegration not only as policy issues, but also as matters of human security, gender equity, and social inclusion. WCAPS has a particular interest in advancing research and policy solutions that address gendered vulnerabilities in migration systems, especially those related to security, violence, and access to services for marginalized populations. Additionally, WCAPS has expressed a strong interest in expanding its knowledge and engagement in the Latina context, currently in understanding how reintegration policies in Mexico, post - fortieth United States administration, impact women and other vulnerable populations. The primary goal of this research project is to critically assess Mexico’s incorporation of gender-sensitive approaches within its reintegration policies in partnership with WCAPS. Given the rise in deportations and the increasing complexity of migration dynamics, it is essential to evaluate whether current policies adequately address both reintegration challenges and postdeportation security risks. This project aims to bridge the gap between high-level policy frameworks and the lived experiences of migrant women by incorporating both policy analysis and qualitative insights. By emphasizing intersectionality, this research recognizes that deported women are not a monolithic group but instead experience reintegration differently based on factors such as age, socioeconomic status, family structure, and exposure to violence. Both WCAPS and the authors of this project prioritize understanding these layered identities to ensure that policy recommendations are grounded in real-world experiences. Ultimately, this work seeks to contribute to more inclusive, sustainable, and gender-responsive reintegration policies that better support the safety, dignity, and long-term success of women returning to Mexico.

Recent Statistical Findings on Deported Women from Mexico In 2024, 46,944 Mexican women were deported from the United States, a 273% increase over the 17,165 deported in 2020. This trend has risen steadily each year (18,721 in 2021, 36,409 in 2022, 38,652 in 2023), highlighting an expanding share of women in deportation figures. Additionally, the top states of origin for deported women include Guerrero (5,342), Chiapas (4,890), and Oaxaca (4,755).12

Figure 1. Sourcedatafrom Tadeo Campoy, “Aumenta 273% Deportación de Mujeres, Según Secretaría de Migración,” El Imparcial, February 17, 2025, https://www.elimparcial.com/mundo/2025/02/17/aumenta-273-deportacion-de-mujeres-segun-secretaria-demigracion/.

Recent official data from Mexico’s Unidad de Política Migratoria (UPM) shows that deportations of Mexican nationals from the United States continued through 2025, with 112,260 return events recorded Jan–Sep 2025, of which approximately 32,434 were women aged 18 and over. Altogether, this indicates that women and girls accounted for around 10.9 percent of total

deportation events during this period, highlighting that while deportations are predominantly male, a significant number of female deportees are returned each year. The data also allows analysis by state of reception; for example, in Sonora there were 1,901 deportation events involving women, and in Tamaulipas there were 2,089, reflecting regional patterns in return distribution.13 Available statistical data from Mexico’s UPM indicates that deportation and repatriation statistics are regularly published in gender-disaggregated form within the Boletines Estadísticos, allowing researchers to track deported women as a subset of all returnees. These bulletins include separate tables for “Devolución de mexicanas y mexicanos desde Estados Unidos,” which can be used to extract annual or monthly counts by gender.14 Reintegration Infrastructure and Immediate Assistance for Deportees Existing literature and policy documentation highlight that Mexico’s reintegration system primarily focuses on providing short-term humanitarian assistance at border reception points. Several border reception centers located in cities such as Tijuana, Nogales, Ciudad Juárez, and Tapachula serve as the first point of contact for many deportees returning from the United States.15 These centers are designed to address deportees’ immediate needs following repatriation by providing temporary lodging, meals, health services, hygiene supplies, and access to communication tools such as free internet and cellular service.16 In addition, deportees may receive assistance obtaining official identification documents, which are often required to access social services or employment opportunities.17 These facilities are generally equipped to provide accommodations and meals for up to three days while helping returnees connect with family members, their home communities, or reintegration programs.18

Beyond these basic services, reintegration centers attempt to facilitate longer-term support by connecting deportees with employment opportunities and social welfare programs. Through collaborations between government agencies and private sector partners, deportees may be matched with companies offering job vacancies or training opportunities. Some initiatives also provide access to healthcare services through IMSS Bienestar, a public healthcare program designed to expand access to medical services for vulnerable populations.19 Deportees may also receive immediate financial assistance, such as a Bienestar Paisano card, which provides approximately $100 USD to help cover basic expenses during the initial reintegration period.20 Additionally, transportation assistance may be provided to help deportees reach their home communities or other support services.21 While these measures demonstrate an effort to facilitate reintegration, the support provided through these programs often focuses primarily on short-term stabilization rather than long-term social or economic integration. Social Welfare Programs and Reintegration Support Government reintegration programs in Mexico frequently operate through broader social welfare initiatives designed to support vulnerable populations. Deportees may be connected to programs that offer pensions, scholarships, vocational training, housing assistance, or local development initiatives.22 These programs are intended to promote economic reintegration and reduce the vulnerability of returning migrants by helping them establish financial stability.23 However, access to these programs is not always guaranteed. Studies suggest that bureaucratic barriers, limited program capacity, and lack of awareness among returnees may prevent deportees from fully benefiting from available services.

Research on reintegration programs also suggests that the effectiveness of these initiatives is often limited by information gaps and administrative challenges. According to Planley-Videla et al., misinformation or insufficient knowledge about available services frequently prevents returnees from accessing assistance programs.24 In some cases, deportees are unaware of the eligibility requirements or procedures needed to enroll in government programs. As a result, the reintegration system may fail to reach individuals who are most in need of support. Gender-Sensitive Reintegration Initiatives In recent years, the Mexican government has attempted to incorporate gender-sensitive elements into its migration and reintegration policies. One prominent example is the reintegration initiative México te Abraza, which seeks to coordinate multiple government services and provide support to deported or returning migrants.25 The program includes certain gender-focused services such as psychological first aid for individuals experiencing crisis situations, including women and children.26 It also offers legal and psychological counseling for cases involving violence against women and provides referrals to appropriate institutions when families require specialized assistance.27 These services represent an effort to recognize the distinct challenges faced by women and families during the reintegration process. However, existing research indicates that genderfocused programming within government reintegration frameworks remains limited. Many reintegration initiatives continue to prioritize economic assistance and employment placement rather than addressing broader gender-specific vulnerabilities such as safety risks, access to healthcare, or women’s exposure to violence.28 Consequently, scholars argue that reintegration

policies may benefit from more comprehensive gender-sensitive approaches that address both immediate needs and long-term social integration. Role of Non-Governmental Organizations Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) play a critical role in supporting deportees and migrants in Mexico, often filling gaps left by government programs. Organizations such as the Institute for Women in Migration (IMUMI) focus specifically on defending the rights of migrant women and providing legal assistance related to migration status, family reunification, and access to services.29 Similarly, the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS) Mexico provides gender-sensitive psychological support, trauma-informed care, and violence-prevention services for migrants, particularly women and girls who have experienced exploitation or violence against women.30 Other organizations provide humanitarian and social support for migrants and deportees through shelters and community programs. For example, migrant shelters may offer temporary housing, counseling services, and food assistance while also providing separate spaces designed to ensure the safety of women and children.31 These organizations frequently serve individuals who arrive without family members or support networks and therefore face greater risks of homelessness or exploitation. While NGOs are often able to tailor services more effectively to women’s needs than government institutions, their work is frequently constrained by limited funding and reliance on external donors. Scholars note that although NGOs provide essential support, the absence of consistent government funding and institutional coordination may limit the scalability and sustainability of these services.

Violence against Women and Structural Vulnerabilities A large amount of research on violence against women in Mexico highlights the broader social and security context in which female deportees must reintegrate. Violence against women remains a persistent and serious issue across the country. The concept of femicide, which refers to the gender-motivated killing of women, emerged in the 1990s in response to the murders of women in Ciudad Juárez and Chihuahua.32 From 1993 to 2000, hundreds of women were murdered or sexually assaulted in this region, bringing international attention to gender violence in Mexico.33 In response to these concerns, Mexico has implemented several legal and policy frameworks aimed at addressing violence against women. International commitments such as the Convention of Belém do Pará and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) recognize violence against women as a form of discrimination and require states to take measures to prevent and address such violence.34 At the national level, Mexico adopted the 2007 Law on Women’s Access to a Life Free of Violence, which seeks to prevent, punish, and eradicate violence against women across all levels of government.35 The law recognizes multiple forms of violence, including psychological, physical, economic, and sexual violence, and identifies patterns of violence in domestic, workplace, and community settings.36 Additional mechanisms such as gender violence alerts issued by the National Commission to Prevent and Eradicate Violence Against Women (CONAVIM) aim to draw attention to regions experiencing high levels of violence against women.37 Despite these legal frameworks, research indicates that violence against women remains widespread. Studies show that 66.1% of women 15 and older in Mexico have reported

experiencing violence at least once in their lives. Unfortunately, many of these such cases go unreported due to stigma, normalization of violence, or lack of trust in authorities.38 Cultural norms associated with machismo and traditional gender roles may further contribute to victimblaming and discourage reporting of abuse.39 Moreover, limited institutional capacity and underfunded law enforcement systems may prevent effective investigation and prosecution of gender-based crimes.40 These structural conditions have important implications for deported women returning to Mexico. Scholars note that migrant women often face additional vulnerabilities related to economic instability, limited social networks, and employment in low-paying sectors. These factors may increase the risk of exploitation, violence, or social marginalization during the reintegration process. Review of the Literature Reviewing current literature on deportation and reintegration shows several important trends in how Mexico helps deportees reintegrate, especially when looking at gender-related issues. First, most reintegration efforts in Mexico focus on short-term, immediate support provided for up to a week instead of longer-term support. Border reception centers in cities like Tijuana, Nogales, Ciudad Juárez, and Tapachula offer basic services such as temporary shelter, food, healthcare, and help with documents. These services are important for stabilizing deportees when they arrive, but the literature shows they usually last anywhere from a few days up to six months, and do not support long-term reintegration. Programs like financial aid, job matching, and healthcare through IMSS Bienestar, the Mexican Social Security Institute, try to offer more

ongoing help, but these are still mostly temporary and do not provide enough support for lasting economic and social stability. Second, access to reintegration and social welfare programs is uneven and often blocked by structural barriers. Even though deportees might qualify for pensions, job training, housing help, and other benefits, they do not always receive them. Complicated paperwork and a lack of information makes it hard for people to join these programs. Because of this, many returnees cannot fully use the services meant to help them, which creates a gap between what the policies promise and what actually happens. Third, the literature points out that gender-sensitive approaches in reintegration policies are still not well developed and are limited in what they cover. Programs like México te Abraza are important steps forward, offering psychological support and help for survivors of violence against women. Still, these efforts are quite limited and do not address all the gender-specific challenges women face, such as long-term safety, access to healthcare, and economic risks. In general, reintegration policies focus more on general economic support than on thorough, gender-responsive solutions. Fourth, non-governmental organizations help fill gaps in government services, especially for women. Groups like IMUMI and HIAS Mexico offer specialized help, such as legal support, trauma care, and programs to prevent violence against women. Shelters and community organizations also provide safe spaces and focused support for women and children. These groups are often more flexible and better able to meet the needs of female deportees, but their

work is limited by funding and because they are not fully included in government reintegration systems. Finally, the literature shows that female deportees return to a society where violence against women and inequality are common. Even though there are laws to protect women, violence is still widespread and often goes unreported in Mexico. Cultural attitudes, weak institutions, and poor enforcement all add to the risks women face. For deported women, who may also deal with financial challenges, fewer social connections, and stigma, these issues make them even more vulnerable during reintegration. Overall, the literature shows a big gap between how reintegration policies are designed and what deported women actually experience. Mexico has set up a system that meets immediate needs and offers some social support, but it does not have a long-term, gender-sensitive plan that deals with security risks and deeper barriers to reintegration. These findings show that policies need to go beyond short-term help and include ongoing, inclusive, and gender-focused strategies. Research Gaps Although existing scholarship provides valuable insights into migration, reintegration policies, and violence against women in Mexico, several gaps remain. Many studies focus broadly on deportation trends or economic reintegration without examining the intersection of gender, security, and reintegration outcomes. Additionally, research often highlights policy frameworks without assessing how these policies function in practice or how deportees themselves perceive reintegration programs.

This project seeks to address these gaps by examining Mexico’s reintegration policies through a gender-sensitive lens and incorporating perspectives from deported individuals and service providers. By combining policy analysis with qualitative research, the study aims to better understand how reintegration programs operate on the ground and whether they adequately address the security concerns and social needs of female deportees.

III.Methodology Our team used multiple methodologies to gather data for this report in order to obtain a holistic and ethnographic understanding of the current status of gender issues, reintegration programs, and deportation reactions as a whole. We informed our initial direction for this study through desk research investigating current policies and protections provided to individuals returning to Mexico, either by deportation, forced return, or self-deportation. During this stage of the research, our team analyzed reports from the Mexican government, independent news sources, and non-governmental organizations, controlling for gender specific policies, programs, or challenges to reintegration in the existing research. This portion also included a review of current statistics from these same organizations, combining to build a comprehensive view of the following topics: 1.Current governmental and non-governmental programs to assist deportees in reintegration to life in Mexico, including housing, legal, employment, health, and psychological assistance as viewed through a gendered lens 2.Internal perceptions of government led programs by non-governmental organizations and Mexican citizens

3.Rates of women vs. men in deportations, self-deportations, and forced returns and their associated push-pull factors in migration decisions 4.The presence of long-term support by any agency for deportees and its reported successes or drawbacks. Using the knowledge gained during this initial discovery phase, our team developed three questionnaires for potential data collection directly from reintegration service providers and deportees; a demographic survey to collect basic metrics on the individuals we may be interviewing, a quantitative survey to gather qualitative data on employment, familial, and residency status (for deportees) and experience with existing reintegration programs and their effectiveness (for service providers), and qualitative interview questions for both service providers and deportees/returnees. We reached out to roughly 70 independent and government organizations with a flyer in English and Spanish including the demographic questionnaire for interested participants and petitioned them for virtual or in person interviews with members of their organization and assistance in connecting us with deportees. Two members of our team traveled to Mexico City for eight days to observe the environment surrounding women’s inclusion in society and social opinion on deportees and reintegration assistance among Mexican citizens. This ethnographic approach gave our team a firsthand view of public opinion of the rights of women and their safety in Mexico both before migration and after returning without clouding from corporate or governmental agendas for data presentation. The team members also conducted formal qualitative interviews with three nongovernmental organizations that worked with migrants, and women’s security, and two formal interviews with individuals who had been deported from the United States in the last year. The

data collection for this report is greatly assisted by the firsthand experiences gained from viewing the environment that these deported women were living in and speaking directly with the service providers involved with reintegrating them. Six other formal interviews were conducted virtually with various NGOs and Mexican government organizations. Our team transcribed, translated, and coded the interviews using a thematic analysis approach, as the interviews revealed trends in thinking between NGOs and affected individuals that opposed official governmental sources. Below, these trends and discrepancies are analyzed further to reveal our strongest takeaways from the overall body of research.

IV.Key Findings Based on a thematic analysis of our in-person and online interviews, as well as a thorough analysis of existing literature on deportation and reintegration experiences and programs in Mexico, our research identified several critical gaps between policy design and lived experience. While Mexico has established a framework intended to support returning migrants, our findings reveal that these efforts often fall short in practice, particularly in addressing longterm reintegration and the complex social, institutional, and gendered challenges deportees face. From this analysis, three key findings emerged, highlighting the limitations of current initiatives, the barriers that hinder effective reintegration, and the ways in which intersecting identities shape the experiences of deported individuals. Lack of Meaningful Initiatives Through our interviews, our group has evaluated the current landscape for deported Mexicans and concluded that it profoundly lacks structured support for reintegration, which

ultimately prolongs the vulnerability of deportees. As several interviews noted, deportees and service providers alike feel as though there are no programs for Mexicans and that México te Abraza is merely a short-term emergency response. One interviewee mentioned that the services they were currently receiving from an NGO after experiencing the services offered by México te Abraza were much more useful. Several interviewees of Mexican origin shared that they felt as though there were more non-governmental reintegration services and initiatives for non-Mexican deportees rather than Mexican nationals. Additionally, multiple interviewees noted little to no financial assistance, and in the cases where it was received, assistance was a one time payment of 3000 pesos (equivalent to ~$167) that is insufficient to cover the costs of living, housing, food, and various other basic necessities. Additionally, when researching funding for governmental reintegration initiatives in Mexico, there was little to no information regarding funding or access to key documents like intake forms. The lack of capacity of these support systems can also be traced back to the withdrawal and dissolution of USAID funding and withdrawal of the United States from humanitarian aid programs. As FOCA explained it, many organizations such as ACNUR, IOM, ILO, among others depended on USAID funds. The removal of those funds along with the increase in deportations are adding extra pressure to a situation that is already at risk of “blowing up.” FOCA went on to compare the Obama administration to the current United States administration. During the Obama administration there were high levels of deportation, but institutional and economic support for Mexico were not affected through the elimination of programs like USAID. Conversely the second Trump administration is conducting deportations without similar forms of assistance, creating a strain on the current Mexican reintegration program which arose directly

from this pressure. As FOCA stated, “we are at the worst moment because there are returnees, but there is no money.” Marta, asked: “Where are the programs for Mexicans?” Additionally, because México te Abraza lacks the long-term support and strategies needed for deportees to successfully reintegrate, this not only means that deportees may be forced to live in unpleasant conditions, but increases the chances of remigration for the deportee. For example, one interviewee saw themselves forced to relocate to a shelter that was also populated by people with substance addictions and other ordeals. The experience was extremely distressful for them, and they saw themselves forced to go back to an NGO shelter so that they could have a roof over their head but not live under unpleasant conditions. Oftentimes, interviewees and service providers noted that the conditions deportees were living under in the United States were much more acceptable and conducive to integration. Some of these conditions were facilitated access to healthcare and job opportunities, as well as living in larger cities instead of more rural areas in case of displacement and homelessness. Therefore, we can conclude that the general current perspective of deportees and service providers is that México te Abraza is not a holistic and comprehensive program meant to ease the process of reintegration. Institutional & Social Barriers to Reintegration Based on literature reviews, our group hypothesized that deportees returning to Mexico would face several barriers to reintegration s. However, the barriers we hypothesized were more to do with gender and patriarchal systems within Mexico, whereas the barriers most discussed by

deportees and service providers alike were more institutional and social in nature. This is not to discount the gendered barriers to reintegration that exist, rather, to highlight that most participants of this study offered an alternative perspective. For example, many deportees arrive without important documentation and identification that is needed to access social welfare programs and services as well as housing. This is often because deportees are removed rather quickly, such as in the case of one of our interviewees, who was picked up by ICE agents at a park where they only had access to the belongings they had on their person at that moment. As a result, when this participant was remigrating into Mexico, she had no documentation which slowed down her reintegration process. Language differences are another barrier that was brought up several times by our interviewees. Those who primarily grew up or lived in the United States may struggle when returning, especially when they are expected to navigate legal paperwork in Spanish, a language they may not be fully comfortable using. This struggle is further compounded by stigma, though our findings suggest that the stigma is rooted less in deportation itself and more in the cultural and social differences individuals face upon return. As deported individuals return to Mexico with complex trauma surrounding their deportations, the expectation of immediate self-sufficiency is unrealistic and

dangerous.

Deportees need a sort of grace period in which services are accessible for weeks or months after their return into Mexico instead of being forced to find ways to provide for themselves the moment they land. Without dedicated programs to bridge the gap between arrival and entering into Mexican society, organizations interviewed for this research agree that the likelihood that

these deportees will migrate again is high, because the factors that caused their initial migration remain unchanged. Impact of Intersectional Identities on the Deportation and Reintegration Process Indigenous communities are just one of the many minority communities that are disproportionately affected by deportation. Mexico has a large indigenous population of about 23.2 million people, and there are over 68 indigenous languages spoken in the country. Language is a very real and significant barrier to accessing services in the process of migration because of the diversity of languages spoken besides Spanish in Mexico. For example, an indigenous person being forced to migrate into Mexico may not be comfortable speaking in Spanish or may not be familiar with the Spanish used for documentation and legal processes, meaning that their experience will be vastly different than someone forcefully migrating into Mexico that is fluent or comfortable speaking and reading Spanish.

Policy Options

1. Improving México Te Abraza As an emergency response, México te Abraza is key for the Mexican population that has been deported. However, improvements can be made to better serve the population it is intended for, Mexican nationals who have been formerly deported through deportation flights. For most, México te Abraza is their first interaction upon arriving in Mexico after having experienced deportation, which can be a very traumatic experience. As such, the program should make the following improvements:

A.Creation of designated safe spaces for deportees in reception/care centers: While some individuals could have taken certain measures to prepare themselves and their families, deportation can still feel — and often is, very unexpected. Upon arriving at a México te Abraza care center, they are faced with questions or decisions that they might not have even considered or acknowledged. Providing safe spaces where deportees can take time to acknowledge and process their experience and consider their needs is integral to them having the ability to make informed decisions for themselves and their families. These safe spaces would be found at the México te Abraza care centers before a full intake is conducted. Information about what to expect and what services are available can be provided, along with some emergency services such as medical attention and emergency phone calls. After the initial information is provided, individuals should be given a determined amount of time, approximately an hour or two, to change their clothing, use hygienic/sanitary services, have a meal, etc. These safe spaces should also have separate areas for men, women, lactating individuals, parents and children, and the LGBTQ+ community. This will create an extra layer of protection and privacy that individuals might need at the moment. a. Strengths: Safe spaces give deportees the chance to consider their options and provide them with a space for personal care, while maintaining safety and privacy. For example, physical pain can go ignored by a person under high-stress situations, like deportation, so letting them decompress can allow urgent medical needs to surface and be addressed at the moment.

b.Limitations: There will be a need for larger and more private spaces when the centers are set up upon the arrival of deportation flights. Longer shifts would also be required as the process can take longer due to the time given to deportees to decompress. Additional personnel might be necessary as well, since certain areas need to remain separated to provide protection and privacy. B.Provide trauma-informed training to service providers: Whether individuals spend time in detention centers or not, deportation is a sudden and life-changing event that aligns with the clinical definition of trauma. While it may not cause chronic trauma for all, it can still result in acute trauma. A trauma-informed care approach centers the individual’s sense of safety and empowerment, and helps build trust between the individual and the service provider. This framework is rooted in the understanding that their reactions or needs are not the result of personal actions, but a response to what they have experienced, and seeks to prevent re-traumatization. This is particularly important for those who might need specific services or support, and might find it hard to disclose if a sense of trust is not built. Therefore, service providers representing the different participating Ministries involved in México te Abraza should be given free trauma-informed care training. This training should be required before service providers even begin interacting with deportees and necessary to continue employment at the welcome centers.

a. Strengths: Providing trauma-informed care will allow individuals to disclose their needs more openly, especially if those needs are related to reproductive health needs or violence against women. Knowing those needs will allow care centers to provide individuals with the necessary resources/services. This will allow better long-term outcomes, diminishing the need for prolonged public assistance. b. Limitations: Training individuals can be costly and time-consuming. Also, even with this training, individuals can still hold on to their biases, which can be rooted on homophobia, transphobia, racial discriminations and others, unconsciously creating unsafe and re-traumatizing experiences for individuals. Further, Requiring this training can impact the number of service providers as it can delay employment start date. C. Provision of essential

items & broader considerations by welcome/reception

centers: While the current initiative provides hygiene kits, the kits should be available so that no individual is left without one. Clothing should also be considered an essential item and made available, as individuals may have spent extended periods in detention centers without the opportunity to change their clothes, particularly their underwear. These resources are particularly beneficial for women and girls, who already face a higher predisposition to UTIs. Wearing non-breathable or overused underwear and the prolonged use of menstrual products may further elevate this risk.

a. Strengths: Helps create a human approach by treating individuals with dignity and building trust. This trust can translate into better communication between deportee and service provider, and better trust of government and government programs. It also prevents future dependence on public programs by preventing severe medical emergencies, which can have long-term consequences. b.Limitations: Extra funding will be needed, and a diverse understanding of what should be included in hygiene kits will be necessary. The understanding will need to go beyond what men and women might need, but also take into account the LGBTQ+ community and cultural aspects of this diverse population. D. Increase financial assistance for deportees with a minor: Paisano cards are given as a means to provide financial assistance for those who have been deported, with a set amount allocated per adult. However, this allocation should account for the added financial responsibility for caring for a minor, recognizing that deported adults with children face greater financial burden than those traveling alone. a. Strengths: It acknowledges the necessities of parents/guardians, a subgroup that has been extremely affected by deportation. b.Limitations: Providing parents/guardians with additional financial assistance does not necessarily translate to better assistance for the minor. Protocols will need to be put in place to guarantee that the assistance is

benefiting the child. An increase in funding will be required without cutting the budget for other programs or assistance. 2. Holistic Program - After México te Abraza As beneficial as

México te Abraza

is, individuals will also benefit from long-term

support. While it is expected that forcibly returned individuals have families, support systems, and an overall safety net, that is not always the case, in particular amongst those who have been away from their country of origin for an extended period of time. The services offered by México te Abraza are useful as a first response, especially because many individuals are still processing what they experienced. Once they settle into their new reality, they may require extra or longterm support so they can better navigate the different systems, institutions and challenges that they encounter and that the current turnaround in México te Abraza cannot provide. Aside from providing this population with emotional support, this holistic program will offer referrals and information on validating education degrees and certificates, obtain necessary Mexican documentation, the job market and other relevant resources. This program would be available not only for those who qualify for México te Abraza assistance – Mexican nationals who have been deported through deportation flights – but also for those who have self-deported/returned/ forcibly returned. Ideally, this program will be run through a collaboration between existing NGOs and the Mexican government, as this would help reduce limitations that each would face if the program were run by either entity alone. This service will be essential in ensuring reintegration continues smoothly for individuals and their families and will allow for the collection of data. As individuals express their needs and satisfaction with the programs they

encounter, the effectiveness of services can be evaluated and improved upon. Ideally, this program will offer the following: A.Development of initial screenings for long-term support: Individuals who have gone through a México te Abraza welcome center will be asked if they are interested in follow-up services. If so, their information will be shared with this long-term program and the individual will be contacted directly. Their screening will serve primarily to verify existing information and assess any changes or new needs that may have arisen. For those who either choose not to participate in follow-up services or have not come into contact with México te Abraza, the program’s contact information will be widely advertised – particularly at key entry points – so they can reach out whenever a need arises. Because no prior information will be available for this group, their screening will be more in-depth and will include a formal determination of eligibility. a. Strengths: It acknowledges that circumstances can change and needs can arise at any moment, giving individuals the opportunity to seek assistance related to their forced return regardless of whether they came into contact with México te Abraza. Strengthens the human-centered approach that is currently lacking. b.Limitations: Trained personnel will be needed, requiring time and money. Also, a small office space will be necessary, considering that not all individuals will have access to phones or internet access. Additionally,

defined parameters will need to be set so as not to overburden the program or service providers. B. Creation and development of shelters for deportees:

As part of the long-term

support, shelters will be available for forced returnees who are in need of a temporary home. These shelters would be located in areas where most forced returnees end up seeking services and employment, and not necessarily at border states or where deportation flights drop them off. Casa de Acogida, Formación y Empoderamiento de la Mujer Migrante y Refugiada (House of Welcome, Formation, and Empowerment for Migrant and Refugee Women, CAFEMIN) and the Kino Border Initiative shelters are good building blocks for these shelters, given their detailed intake process and holistic approach. Safety protocols will need to be in place through the separation of women, men, families, and, if needed, the LGBTQ+ community in the living spaces. Additionally, assistance like food and child care, as well as support in identifying and navigating permanent housing options. Remaining services will be available at drop-in centers, which will ideally be located within the same facility or nearby. a. Strengths: The population will benefit by having a space that is tailored to their unique needs, creating a sense of community as well. This also takes into consideration that not everyone has support networks upon forced returned/deportation and that dynamics between families can quickly change given this life changing event. In particular women and vulnerable

populations would benefit from this as they might no longer find themselves accepting certain norms or traditions. b.Limitations: Funding and a physical space will be needed to achieve this, along with personnel. The physical space will need to be big enough to provide private and separate accommodations, and personnel will be needed around the clock. Additional items such as food and furniture will also be essential, adding to the financial costs of the program. C. Creation and development of drop-in centers:

These centers would ideally be

located near or at the same facility as shelters but held in a separate section. These centers will provide health care services, including psychosocial support, employment assistance, and legal assistance. While some of these services will be accessible virtually, a physical space must also be available, particularly for those seeking health services While Mexicans receive free or low-cost services through existing government welfare programs, not everyone has the proper documentation to obtain those services right away. This is particularly true for individuals who left Mexico very young or those born outside of Mexico to Mexican parents. Making sure that they have access to medical services while their documents are being processed is important. Given that the process to obtain the proper documentation can be complicated and unknown, individuals will receive assistance in obtaining their necessary documentation. For those needing support in obtaining Mexican

documents, a referral or accompaniment might suffice, but if legal advice is necessary, the center can provide that directly or look to partner with another organization that provides legal expertise. Our research shows that some individuals will also need support obtaining assets from the United States after returning; legal assistance will be necessary in these cases as well. The services suggested could be offered by direct hires of these shelters or by partnering up with an existing organization already providing this support. Due to Mexico’s employment crisis, having employment development assistance will also be a crucial facet of this continuing service. This assistance would range from validating foreign credentials to job seeking to skill development. CAFEMIN has a craft-making shop where women not only learn how to sew, but also the different components that come with owning a small business. Creative initiatives like that one not only serve as healing tools but also as beacons for entrepreneurship by allowing individuals to gain transferable skills while earning an income. a. Strengths: Provides a holistic, human-centered approach, acknowledging the different needs that individuals might face during their reintegration journey. b.Limitations: Funding and a physical space will be needed to achieve this, along with personnel.

VI.Recommendations We believe that both of our policy options are equally important, hence we recommend that both are implemented. Given that improving México te Abraza is the most feasible and obtainable out of the three options, we consider this a short-term goal since the initiative is already established and has gained support. The creation of a long-term program would be a midterm goal. This is equally important as improving Mexico te Abraza, but will take more time to build as program briefs will need to be created in order to gain donors and funders, and then the actual implementation will need to take place. Having a reintegration law package is a long-term goal that would be dependent on the recommended policy options. For this data might be necessary and best obtained through the two other options. Recommending a law package as a policy option is not feasible at this moment due to lack of information and best practices to do so. Both of these policy options are designed to enhance and ease the reintegration experience for deportees and can also serve as a model program for other countries experiencing high reintegration needs. We believe them to be most effective together when implemented with a phased approach, starting with the improvement of México te Abraza to provide immediate humanitarian relief, and following it with our medium to long-term holistic assistance. The limitations inherent to the improvement to both include the need to bring in and train personnel and to find the appropriate spaces for these services to exist. With the improvement of México te Abraza, the spaces and personnel already exist, they just need renovation and additional training, which is why we recommend pursuing this option first and this option only if one must choose between the two.

The mid term holistic program will take a significantly larger financial and time commitment to prepare adequately, as it will be creating services where none previously existed and will be disadvantaged due to lack of precedent. When built off of the improved México te Abraza, we believe it will have a significantly higher impact and chance of success than if it were to be implemented alone.

VII.Implementation The policy options recommended in the previous section are established programs and improvements designed to enhance the reintegration journey of individuals. There are several foundational steps that need to be taken when implementing these policy options to ensure that they are able to reach and support the groups that they are meant to serve. These include: improving outreach efforts to raise awareness of available programs and individual rights; increasing funding to implement the necessary changes and programs; ensuring program visibility and transparency to maintain the trust of the public, donors, and investing partners; and adopting a gender equality and socially inclusive approach to prevent further inequalities. A.Improving Outreach: There is available information online about México te abraza, and based on our research, the Mexican officials in the United States also work to promote the different ways in which individuals can ease their reintegration process. Regardless, there remains a need to reach the wider population affected by deportation or the fear of it. 1.Available information at various entry points: Not every individual is forced to return through deportation flights; some cross the border while

others take flights. Therefore, information on whether that is a sheet or pamphlet with helpful information and phone numbers should be distributed at different entry points in Mexico. 2.Dedicated phone line/chat: A non-emergency secure phone line or chat that individuals who have been forced to return, are considering returning, or are at risk of deportation can easily reach for information, guidance, or referrals. For example, they can be directed to the institution that can help them with crediting their studies or to an organization that can help them obtain custody of their children. 3. Increasing AI knowledge on the subject: As individuals use and rely on AI to obtain information, it will be important to ensure that the information provided by AI regarding México te Abraza and any other program or initiative is accurate and up to date. 4.

Partnering with local organizers and NGOs: as our research and communications with various organizations and stakeholders showed, there is no shortage of companies that are looking into some aspect of this situation. By partnering with local groups that have a strong understanding of the needs of everyday people, the improved governmental programs will be grounded in approaches that they can ensure will be effective.

B.Increase Funding: Having stable funding is important, and it could come from the public and private sectors and NGOs. Funding for an improved and holistic México te Abraza will have long-term effects on overall migration trends. As individuals feel more

dignified and supported upon their return to Mexico, their need to migrate again may decrease. These programs can work towards wealth building within communities by supporting returnees in a longer-term capacity and providing services tailored to employment development. This will help eliminate a major push factor, and therefore reduce the number of migrants and deportees over time. Additionally, the Mexican economy could see some long-term positive impacts as innovation and productivity increase. 1.Private donors might be interested in contributing to programs and initiatives like these for different motives. Each donor might be approached differently, but at the core is the idea that successful reintegration is beneficial not just to the population it serves, but to society and governments in general. For example, Tecate might be a private company that will be interested in donating funds given its current partnership with FUNDES and Tiendas SIX aimed at training, mentoring and providing employment opportunities to returnees.41 2.The government of Mexico is already deeply involved in funding and building up the infrastructure, but we see additional opportunities to garner funding from the United States. Our interviews and research showed that relevant organizations and programs previously received funding through USAID, which has been dismantled as the organization went against the Trump Administration’s national strategy of America First. However, in an effort to uphold border security initiatives in line

with current strategies, we believe that some funds that would have previously been allocated for USAID could be reallocated to these initiatives to provide security and success within Mexico and remove the need for migration, thus fulfilling the United States’ desire to lower immigration rates and solidify borders. Similarly, a reduction in “illegal migration” can have major financial impacts on coyotes and, therefore, major criminal organizations. 3.International NGOs (INGOs) might also be inclined to support this work in two ways. The first is by lobbying around international governmental support to encourage the United States to pursue border security through this method. Additionally, various NGOs that we covered in our research expressed desire to see more done from an official, collaborative standpoint. Encouraging those groups to support these initiatives financially in return for utilizing their expertise will allow them the opportunity to make broader impacts on these issues as a whole. C.Program Visibility and Transparency: Programs and initiatives need a visible and transparent policy allowing the public to see how their budget is spent. It should also give a clear picture of where the money is coming from and how much is coming from the different donors and funding partners. Similarly, requests for documents such as intake forms and releases of information should be available upon request. D.Gender Equality and Social Inclusion (GESI) Approach: Given the many intersectionalities present amongst the deported population, it is important to guarantee

equal rights, opportunities, and access to resources. Using this approach ensures this. While this approach can be implemented at any stage, it is better to include it from the very beginning to prevent further inequalities. Having interpreters and translators will be key, as it is important to acknowledge that while Spanish is the main language in the country, that does not mean it is the language of all deportees. Gender consideration should also be at the center since historically, gender has been an afterthought of program implementation, and the consideration that those with children or dependents face greater barriers to reintegration. In terms of tangible implementation steps, for both the improvement of México te Abraza and the creation of the holistic, long term program, there are two main needs: physical spaces and personnel. The improved México te Abraza would be built off of the existing infrastructure around their reception centers. The goal would be to repurpose the spaces to create a more sensitive experience, allowing people the safety and privacy necessary to process the trauma that they have experienced during return regardless of the method. Similarly, with the established blueprint of the updated reception centers, the creation of shelters and drop-in centers for deportees would be able to take advantage of existing infrastructure in most cases, reducing upfront costs and delays to their deployment. Research will need to be conducted on the best locations for the longer term facilities associated with the holistic program. After the implementation of the improved México te Abraza reception centers, government planners will have a clearer understanding of what will best serve these spaces in terms of layout, size, and amenities. From there, locations will be narrowed down

based on areas where deported populations are more concentrated, allowing the facilities to serve these groups more effectively. Similarly, partnering with NGOs located in key areas that already have the existing infrastructure needed would help to reduce costs. Adequate training of personnel is the other most important factor to effective implementation. The Mexican government should partner with local, reliable organizations that already offer this type of care to integrate it into the training of federal employees at a higher speed than if they have to develop the training plans internally. Additionally, for the holistic programs, service providers will need to have a breadth of expertise, including professional training in legal aid, psychological support, and translations. For legal aid and psychological support this research shows that there are multiple organizations in Mexico that specialize in disciplines such as migrants rights and trauma-informed care of migrants. By partnering with these organizations, the Mexican government will be able to provide these services expeditiously compared to the timeline of creating internal departments to handle these specific issues. For the training of translators, the biggest concern is accessing the breadth of indigenous languages in Mexico. We envision a language line that can be easily accessed by service providers, whose translators and interpreters have a basic knowledge of the program, and have at least one person on schedule for each indigenous language spoken in the country. This would help to create jobs for members of indigenous communities, as well as encouraging the preservation of both indigenous languages and culture. The proposed timeline for implementing these policy options is as follows: Month/Year Implemented practices

6 Months

● ● ● ●

9 Months

● Initial training complete for improved México te abraza personnel ● Reception center renovations begin alongside improvement of care and available resources ● Data collection begins

1 Year

● ● ● ● ● ●

2 Years

● Location assessments are finished ● Data is analyzed and used to guide the location of and services offered at shelters and drop-in centers ● Government/NGO partnerships are solidified

2.5 Years

● Training of federal employees in legal and psychological support disciplines underway ● Construction begins for drop-in centers and shelters

3 Years

● ● ● ●

Outreach and funding improved to support incoming programs Recruitment and training of personnel begins Assessment of currently available infrastructure is completed Methods for best data collection practices are considered

Trauma-informed approaches are standard in all centers Paisano cards factor in children Renovation of centers underway/completed Language line and call center are active and working Assessment of locations for deportee shelters and drop-in centers begins Government selects external organizations to partner with for training and outsourcing expertise for holistic program

Construction completed on all facilities Personnel training completed across disciplines Programs are available to be fully implemented Shelters are furnished with essentials items

VIII.Conclusion This research began as an investigation into how gender was being incorporated into existing government assistance, but as we’ve seen the issue at hand much deeper. Through this research, we have discovered the lack of comprehensive support for migrants and deportees in Mexico, regardless of gender or status. From this revelation, we see an opportunity to bring those

gendered considerations into the establishment of the support that is lacking, to keep gender in mind from the beginning rather than trying to adapt an existing program to take those considerations into account. This issue is far more intersection than anticipated, crossing linguistic barriers, continental borders, gender, and income disparities. There is no singular correct approach to solving an issue such as this, but we believe that inclusivity in our approach is the first step towards trying.

IX.Endnotes 1.U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, “ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations Statistics,” March 17, 2025, https://www.ice.gov/statistics. 2.The White House, “Protecting the American People against Invasion,” January 21, 2025, https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/protecting-the-american-peopleagainst-invasion/. 3.MND Staff, “United Nations Refugee Agency Closes 4 Offices in Mexico due to US Funding Cuts,” Mexico News Daily, April 30, 2025, https://mexiconewsdaily.com/news/ unhcr-reduces-mexico-operations-funding-cuts/. 4.Alianza Americas, “What Measures Does the ‘México te abraza’ Plan Include to Support Its Deported or Repatriated Population?” 2023, https://www.alianzaamericas.org/tool/ what-measures-does-the-mexico-te-abraza-plan-include-to-support-its-deported-orrepatriated-population. 5.“Pensión Mujeres Bienestar,” Gobierno de México, August 2025, https:// programasparaelbienestar.gob.mx/pension-mujeres-bienestar/.

6.Higinio Fernández-Sánchez et al., “Reinforcing, Negotiating and Resisting Gender Norms among Reunited Couples in Mexico: An Intersectional Critical Ethnography,” Cogent Social Sciences 9, no. 2 (2023), 2, https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2276139. 7.Anita Isaacs and Anne Preston, “Return Migration and the Challenges of Reintegration in Mexico,” Wilson Center, May 20, 2024, 6, https://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/ return-migration-and-challenges-reintegration-mexico. 8.Puja Pandit, “Violence against Women in Mexico,” Vision of Humanity, May 13, 2025, https://mexicanpressagency.org/newsroom-posts/citizens-repatriated/. 9.Daphnée Denis and Alma Rodríguez, “Feminicidios en México, una epidemia en aumento,” El País, March 9, 2017, https://elpais.com/especiales/2017/feminicidios-enmexico/#. 10.Ruth Fertig, “Dispatch from Mexico: Difficulties Abound for Both Deported Individuals and Service Providers,” Women’s Refugee Commission, August 5, 2025, https:// www.womensrefugeecommission.org/blog/dispatch-from-mexico-difficulties-abound-forboth-deported-individuals-and-service-providers/. 11.Ministry of Foreign Affairs, “New Options and Assistance for Returning and Repatriated Migrant Families in Education, Health and Economic Development,” June 22, 2021, https://www.gob.mx/sre/prensa/new-options-and-assistance-for-returning-and-repatriatedmigrant-families-in-education-health-and-economic-development?idiom=en. 12.Tadeo Campoy, “Aumenta 273% Deportación de Mujeres, Según Secretaría de Migración,” El Imparcial, February 17, 2025, https://www.elimparcial.com/mundo/ 2025/02/17/aumenta-273-deportacion-de-mujeres-segun-secretaria-de-migracion/.

13.Secretaría de Gobernación, “Política Migratoria,” accessed October 2, 2025, https:// portales.segob.gob.mx/es/PoliticaMigratoria/principal_i. 14.Secretaría de Gobernación (SEGOB), Unidad de Política Migratoria, “Cuadros Estadísticos: Boletín Migratorio 2025,” 2025, https://portales.segob.gob.mx/es/ PoliticaMigratoria/CuadrosBOLETIN?Anual=2025&Secc=5. 15.Pamela Cruz, “‘México te Abraza’ Program Welcomes Over 38,000 Repatriated Mexicans from the U.S.,” May 9, 2025, https://mexicanpressagency.org/newsroom-posts/citizensrepatriated/. 16.Ibid 17.José Escobedo, “Mexico Government, Private Sector: Job Vacancies for Deportees,” Mexico Business News, February 13, 2025, https://mexicobusiness.news/ policyandeconomy/news/mexico-government-private-sector-job-vacancies-deportees. 18.Ibid 19.Pamela Cruz, “‘México te Abraza’ Program Welcomes Over 38,000 Repatriated Mexicans from the U.S.,” May 9, 2025, https://mexicanpressagency.org/newsroom-posts/citizensrepatriated/. 20.José Escobedo, “Mexico Government, Private Sector: Job Vacancies for Deportees,” Mexico Business News, February 13, 2025, https://mexicobusiness.news/ policyandeconomy/news/mexico-government-private-sector-job-vacancies-deportees. 21.Ibid

22.Nancy Plankey-Videla et al., “Beyond Mass Deportation,” Columbia Human Rights Law Review 57, no. 1 (2025): 2, https://hrlr.law.columbia.edu/files/2025/11/PlankeyVidela_Beyond-Mass-Deportation_Final-Upload.pdf. 23.Ibid, 2 24.Ibid, 1 25.Secretaría de Gobernación, “Política Migratoria,” accessed October 2, 2025, https:// portales.segob.gob.mx/es/PoliticaMigratoria/principal_i. 26.Ibid 27.Ibid 28.Eduardo Marsan, “SEGOB Reporta Más de 436 Mil Servicios de Apoyo a Paisanos con el Programa ‘México te Abraza,’” Infobae, August 1, 2025, https://www.infobae.com/ mexico/2025/08/01/segob-reporta-mas-de-436-mil-servicios-de-apoyo-a-paisanos-con-elprograma-mexico-te-abraza/. 29.Instituto para las Mujeres en la Migración (IMUMI), “Nuestro Trabajo,” accessed October 2, 2025, https://imumi.org/nuestro-trabajo/. 30.HIAS, “Mexico,” accessed March 23, 2026, https://hias.org/where/mexico/. 31.Samuel Benson, “In Mexico City, U.S. Deportees Start a New Life,” Deseret News, February 22, 2025, https://www.deseret.com/politics/2025/02/22/in-mexico-city-usdeportees-start-a-new-life. 32.Emily Acevedo, “Gender-Based Violence and Femicide in Mexico,” in International Responses to Gender-Based Domestic Violence (New York: Routledge, 2023), 39, https://

www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781003264040-5/gender-based-violencefemicide-mexico-emily-acevedo. 33.Ibid, 39 34.Ibid, 45 35.Ibid, 39 36.Ibid, 39 37.Ibid, 49 38.Flor Avellaneda and Luis R. Torres, “Violence against Women in Mexico City,” in International Responses to Gender-Based Domestic Violence, ed. D. Scharff Peterson and D. Zhang (New York: Routledge, 2023), 51, https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/ 10.4324/9781003264040-6/violence-women-mexico-city-flor-avellaneda-luis-torres. 39.Ibid, 51 40.Ibid, 51 41.Sara Tesfai, “Beer Brand Builds Jobs and Convenience Stores with Deported Mexican Migrants,” TrendWatching, April 23, 2026, https://www.trendwatching.com/innovations/ beer-brand-builds-jobs-and-convenience-stores-with-deported-mexican-migrants. X.

Bibliography

1.Acevedo, Emily. “Gender-Based Violence and Femicide in Mexico.” In International Responses to Gender-Based Domestic Violence, 39–50. New York: Routledge, 2023. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781003264040-5/gender-basedviolence-femicide-mexico-emily-acevedo.

2.Alianza Americas. “What Measures Does the ‘México te abraza’ Plan Include to Support Its Deported or Repatriated Population? | Alianza Americas.” Alianza Americas, 2023. https://www.alianzaamericas.org/tool/what-measures-does-the-mexico-te-abraza-planinclude-to-support-its-deported-or-repatriated-population. 3.Avellaneda, Flor, and Luis R. Torres. “Violence against Women in Mexico City.” In International Responses to Gender-Based Domestic Violence, edited by D. Scharff Peterson and D. Zhang, 51–57. New York: Routledge, 2023. https:// www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781003264040-6/violence-womenmexico-city-flor-avellaneda-luis-torres. 4.Benson, Samuel. “In Mexico City, U.S. Deportees Start a New Life.” Deseret News, February 22, 2025. https://www.deseret.com/politics/2025/02/22/in-mexico-city-usdeportees-start-a-new-life/. 5.Campoy, Tadeo. “Aumenta 273% Deportación de Mujeres, Según Secretaría de Migración.” El Imparcial, February 17, 2025. https://www.elimparcial.com/mundo/ 2025/02/17/aumenta-273-deportacion-de-mujeres-segun-secretaria-de-migracion/. 6.Consulado General de México. “Somos Mexicanos.” Avisos, Consulmex. Accessed October 2, 2025. https://consulmex.sre.gob.mx/austin/index.php/avisos/142-somosmexicanos. 7.Cruz, Pamela “‘México te Abraza’ Program Welcomes Over 38,000 Repatriated Mexicans from the U.S.” May 9, 2025. https://mexicanpressagency.org/newsroom-posts/ citizens-repatriated/.

8.Denis, Daphnée , and Alma Rodríguez. “Feminicidios En México, Una Epidemia En Aumento.” El País, March 9, 2017. https://elpais.com/especiales/2017/feminicidios-enmexico/#. 9.Escobedo, José. “Mexico Government, Private Sector: Job Vacancies for Deportees.” Mexico Business News, February 13, 2025. https://mexicobusiness.news/ policyandeconomy/news/mexico-government-private-sector-job-vacancies-deportees. 10.Fertig, Ruth. “Dispatch from Mexico: Difficulties Abound for Both Deported Individuals and Service Providers.” Women’s Refugee Commission, August 5, 2025. https:// www.womensrefugeecommission.org/blog/dispatch-from-mexico-difficulties-aboundfor-both-deported-individuals-and-service-providers/. 11.Fernández-Sánchez, Higinio, Jordana Salma, Sara Dorow, and Bukola Salami. “Reinforcing, negotiating and resisting gender norms among reunited couples in Mexico: An intersectional critical ethnography.” Cogent Social Sciences 9, no. 2, (2023), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2276139. 12.Gobierno de México, Mujeres, accessed October 2, 2025, https://www.gob.mx/ mujeres#15421. 13.HIAS. “Mexico.” Accessed March 23, 2026. https://hias.org/where/mexico/. 14.Instituto Nacional de Migración, “Dirección de Repatriación Digna (Programa de Repatriación),” Gobierno de México, October 5, 2022, accessed October 2, 2025, https:// www.gob.mx/inm/acciones-y-programas/programa-de-repatriacion-12469 15.Instituto para las Mujeres en la Migración, AC (IMUMI), “Nuestro Trabajo,” IMUMI, accessed October 2, 2025, https://imumi.org/nuestro-trabajo/.

16.Isaacs, Anita and Anne Preston, “Return Migration and the Challenges of Reintegration in Mexico,” Wilson Center, May 20, 2024, 1-18. https://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/ return-migration-and-challenges-reintegration-mexico. 17.Marsan, Eduardo. “SEGOB Reporta Más de 436 Mil Servicios de Apoyo a Paisanos con el Programa ‘México te Abraza.’” Infobae, August 1, 2025. https://www.infobae.com/ mexico/2025/08/01/segob-reporta-mas-de-436-mil-servicios-de-apoyo-a-paisanos-con-elprograma-mexico-te-abraza/. 18.“México Te Abraza.” Consulado General de México en Los Ángeles, Gobierno de México. Accessed September 30, 2025. https://consulmex.sre.gob.mx/losangeles/ index.php/es/avisos/976-mexico-te-abraza. 19.Ministry of Foreign Affairs. “New Options and Assistance for Returning and Repatriated Migrant Families in Education, Health and Economic Development.” gob.mx, June 22, 2021. https://www.gob.mx/sre/prensa/new-options-and-assistance-for-returning-andrepatriated-migrant-families-in-education-health-and-economic-development?idiom=en. 20.MND Staff. “United Nations Refugee Agency Closes 4 Offices in Mexico Due to U.S. Funding Cuts.” Mexico News Daily, April 30, 2025. https://mexiconewsdaily.com/news/ unhcr-reduces-mexico-operations-funding-cuts/. 21.Pandit, Puja. “Violence against Women in Mexico.” Vision of Humanity, May 13, 2025. https://www.visionofhumanity.org/violence-against-women-in-mexico/. 22.“Pensión Mujeres Bienestar.” Programas para el Bienestar, Gobierno de México, August 2025.https://programasparaelbienestar.gob.mx/pension-mujeres-bienestar/.

23.Plankey-Videla, Nancy, Huyen Pham, Angela D. Morrison, and Luz E. Herrera. “Beyond Mass Deportation.” Columbia Human Rights Law Review 57, no. 1 (2025): 1–107. https://hrlr.law.columbia.edu/files/2025/11/Plankey-Videla_Beyond-MassDeportation_Final-Upload.pdf. 24.Secretaría de Gobernación, Política Migratoria. Accessed October 2, 2025. “Principal_i,” Portales Segob.https://portales.segob.gob.mx/es/PoliticaMigratoria/principal_i. 25.Secretaría de Gobernación (SEGOB), Unidad de Política Migratoria. “Cuadros Estadísticos: Boletín Migratorio 2025.” 2025. https://portales.segob.gob.mx/es/ PoliticaMigratoria/CuadrosBOLETIN?Anual=2025&Secc=5. 26.Tesfai, Sara. “Beer Brand Builds Jobs and Convenience Stores with Deported Mexican Migrants.” TrendWatching, April 23, 2026. https://www.trendwatching.com/innovations/ beer-brand-builds-jobs-and-convenience-stores-with-deported-mexican-migrants. 27.The White House. “Protecting the American People against Invasion.” The White House, January 21, 2025. https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/protectingthe-american-people-against-invasion/. 28.Unidad de Política Migratoria, Registro e Identidad de Personas, Secretaría de Gobernación. Boletín Mensual de Estadísticas Migratorias, 2025. Mexico City: Secretaría de Gobernación, 2025. http://www.politicamigratoria.gob.mx/work/models/ PoliticaMigratoria/CEM/Estadisticas/Boletines_Estadisticos/2025/Boletin_2025.pdf. 29.U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. “ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations Statistics.” March 17, 2025. https://www.ice.gov/statistics.

Thank You ! The researchers and fellows of EVA at GWU, as well as, WCAPS acknowledge and thank the responding organizations who participated in interviews and supported the research.

Instituto para las Mujeres en la Migración (Imumi) Casa de Acogida, Formación y Empoderamiento de la Mujer (Cafemin) Kino Border Initiative The Rhizome Center for Migrants Pueblo y Comunidades Indígenas Transfronterizos Centro de los Derechos del Migrante Centro 32 Formación y Capacitación (FOCA) Chirla Redes migrantes

Beyond The Border: Reintegration Challenges for Women Returning to Mexico