Target 10.7: Orderly, safe migration
Facilitate orderly, safe, regular and responsible migration and mobility of people, including through the implementation of planned and well-managed migration policies
Owners voting their values help. Others must carry most of it.
Why shareholder democracy is helpful
Migration policy is governmental, but two documented corporate levers exist. The first is publicly traded detention contractors. CREW found that CoreCivic, GEO Group and their PACs, subsidiaries and CEOs gave 2,779,000 dollars to Trump's 2024 election and inaugural funds. The 2025 budget law then allocated 45 billion dollars for ICE detention contracting. An ICCR-led proposal for a human-rights implementation report won 88 percent support at GEO Group's 2019 meeting. The second is employers and recruiters. The Global Compact's Progress Declaration assigns the private sector a role in fair recruitment and in reducing or banning worker-paid recruitment fees, as IHRB describes. These levers are marginal relative to state policy, so owners help at the margin.
How this was scoredHelpful
Helpful. Owners voting their values help. Others must carry most of it.
We have not yet written down the two answers behind this rating. Recording them on every item, so a reader can check the reasoning and not only the conclusion, is work in progress.
Every rating is the higher of two answers, one for what companies do and one for what they spend to stop the outcome, because the same vote reaches both. See the full method.
Sources
- Trump's budget bill benefits private immigration detention companies that donated to Trump, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, 2025-07-23
- Investors say GEO Group is ill-prepared to guard against human rights risks, Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility, 2019-11-18
- The Global Migration Compact and the Role of Business, Institute for Human Rights and Business, 2022-06-07
What civil society organizations are helping owners on this
Coordinated member resolutions at six companies exposed to immigration enforcement contracting, covering detention conditions, facial recognition sales to immigration authorities and financing of private prison operators.
4 campaigns on record
Address the bank's funding of contractors implementing the zero tolerance immigration policy.
Result: not stated in source
SunTrust halted private prison financing in July 2019.
Address allegations of forced labour and inadequate medical care in the company's detention facilities.
Result: not stated in source
Publish a yearly report, starting in September 2019, showing how the company puts the human rights part of its own policy into practice: whether staff are trained on the human rights of the people it detains, what measures it uses to judge its performance and who checks them, and how it fixes shortfalls.
With Mercy Investment Services, Sisters of St. Francis of Philadelphia, Dominican Sisters of Hope, Northwest Coalition for Responsible Investment
Result: GEO Group asked the Securities and Exchange Commission for permission to leave the proposal out of its proxy on four separate grounds. The staff was unable to agree on any of them and said the proposal transcends ordinary business matters. It went to a vote and passed with 88 percent support at the 2019 annual meeting.
GEO Group produced a report. The investors who filed said in November 2019 that it fell far short of what they had asked for and did not meet current standards for human rights policies. In February 2026 the same investors said the company had cut back its human rights reporting and had moved to keep further proposals of this kind off the ballot.
Address the human rights risk in the bank's credit and bond underwriting for private prison and detention operators.
Result: not stated in source
Wells Fargo ended its relationships with GEO Group and CoreCivic in March 2019, and SunTrust halted private prison financing in July 2019.
Related subjects on other maps
How this rating was made
Every item on every one of our maps is read against one question: how far does this depend on the people who own companies voting their values? We answer it twice, once for what companies do and once for what they spend to stop the outcome, and take whichever answer is higher, since the same vote reaches both. The score carries its reasoning and its sources so that a reader can check it rather than take it.
- Pivotal. Owners voting their values can deliver most of the outcome.
- Necessary. Owners remove an obstacle nothing else removes, and others must also act.
- Helpful. Owners voting their values help, and others carry most of it.
- Independent. This moves without owners. Other levers carry it.
The advocacy record on this page holds only what a source we opened says happened. Where we searched and found nothing, the page says so rather than leaving a silence. Where a campaign names a filer the source does not name, it says that too. Ratings are ours; the list of subjects is UN Sustainable Development Goals's, and we link to their original.
How we score dependency, in full.