Recruiting Nurses Abroad Instead of Rebuilding Nursing at Home

By Linda Brickman

The Deep State/Third-World Takeover of American Nursing Begins!

Minnesota’s taxpayer-financed Kenyan recruitment program raises questions about retention, employer incentives, and public spending

Another Assault on Americans First?

Government-backed, Minnesota senior-care employers are building a pathway from Kenya to American nursing jobs. Not only are they organizing recruitment and immigration assistance, but they are providing advantageous financial support to help foreign-born nurses settle into new communities.

That is a substantial effort. It deserves an equally substantial question: What are these employers doing to bring American-born nurses already here, back into unfilled nursing positions?

Older Americans need dependable care. Families cannot put a loved one’s needs on hold while employers, unions, and policymakers argue about staffing. But filling today’s vacancies and rebuilding tomorrow’s workforce requires us to examine why positions remain empty in the first place.

Reporting by Natalie Winters brought this Minnesota recruitment effort to wider attention. The organization’s own accounts document its development. They also leave important questions about compensation and taxpayer spending unanswered.

How the recruitment operation developed

According to LeadingAge Minnesota’s February 2024 account, a January delegation traveled to Nairobi, Kenya under the leadership of Minnesota State Rep. Mohamud Noor. Noor had collaborated with Kenyan officials and Pearson VUE on a new NCLEX testing center. Delegates also visited recruitment agencies and nursing education facilities.

STRATEGIC INSIGHT – Is this strategy out of the Muslim Immigration Civilization Jihad Playbook, promoted by the Minnesota Muslim community?

The Global Aging Network’s industry feature traces the subsequent creation of Global Care Recruiters (GCR) in August 2024 to four Minnesota nursing home providers: Guardian Angels Senior Services, Mount Olivet, Prairie Senior Cottages, and Vista Prairie Communities. A July 2026 partnership brought operational support from LeadingAge Minnesota Solutions, while GCR retained independent governance.

By September, the GCR reported more than 60 RNs in the Minnesota pipeline and more than 100 candidates undergoing legal review and employer interviews. Those figures should not be added together: the account does not establish that the groups are entirely separate. A recruitment pipeline is also not a count of nurses who have already arrived or filled jobs.

The program targets long-term care. Its public descriptions include employer-sponsored EB-3 immigration, coverage of immigration-process costs, and temporary housing support. Those advertised arrangements deserve comparison with the support available to people recruited within the United States.

For this program, candidates must have passed the NCLEX-RN examination used for U.S. nursing licensure. Passing that examination alone does not complete every state licensing or immigration requirement.

The “alleged” staffing problem and the retention question

The providers describe a serious staffing need. Their 2026 Long-Term Care Imperative survey messaging reports approximately 11,750 vacancies in key Minnesota aging-services positions, including more than 1,300 RN vacancies. Caregiver and nursing-assistant vacancies account for the largest gap. The same document reports waiting lists at 35 percent of nursing facilities.

These are industry-reported figures. The document is a set of survey talking points, rather than a complete methodology report. Still, its account of restricted admissions identifies a practical consequence that families and policymakers should take seriously.

However, a different perspective comes from National Nurses United. The union estimates that approximately 1.15 million actively licensed RNs were not employed as RNs nationwide in May 2025. It reached that estimate by comparing about 4.91 million active license holders with 3.76 million employed RNs, and argues that working conditions have created a retention crisis.

That estimate is not a government unemployment count. It does not identify citizenship, availability, willingness to return, or suitability for a particular opening. A nationwide licensing-and-employment gap cannot simply be matched against vacancies in rural Minnesota.

It does, however, support a question employers should be prepared to answer:

What have you learned from nurses who left, and what have you changed to persuade them to return?

What Schedule A changes – Enter the Deep State

The immigration rules matter to the question of who gets considered first. Under 20 CFR 656.5, professional nurses are Schedule A workers. Bureaucrats at the U.S. Department of Labor have made an occupation-wide determination that sufficient qualified and available U.S. workers are lacking and that employing foreign workers will not adversely affect similarly employed U.S. workers.

That determination replaces the ordinary employer-specific labor-market test. An employer does not have to conduct that usual test for each sponsored nursing position. However, Schedule A applications still require a prevailing-wage determination and notice to the bargaining representative or employees, along with qualifying documentation.

So, the KEY Policy Question here is whether an occupation-wide determination adequately reflects today’s different local markets, specialties, and working conditions. Following the existing process does not establish wrongdoing itself. But it also does not end the debate over whether that process serves workers and patients well.

Compare equivalent jobs and complete offers

Public advertisements give us a starting point. An employer-hosted Vista Prairie RN listing for Ridgeway on German in New Ulm, Minnesota advertises $70,000 to $90,000 annually, welcomes new graduates, and describes full-time day work with rotating on-call duties.

Benefits listed include insurance, retirement, paid leave, and education assistance. It does not mention housing or relocation assistance.

That omission does not establish that such help is unavailable. Nor does the listing identify a package reserved for domestic applicants. A useful comparison requires equivalent jobs, experience, shifts, locations, and actual recruitment terms.

There is some evidence of investment in existing workers, too. Guardian Angels’ careers page advertises nursing-assistant training and tuition reimbursement and nurse-loan forgiveness at participating sites. Those programs belong in the assessment alongside overseas recruitment.

For comparison purposes, the employers should:

explain whether comparable relocation or temporary housing support is available to nurses recruited elsewhere in the United States, and
identify what they spend on retention, return-to-practice support, and domestic recruitment, and what results those efforts produce.

The public evidence reviewed so far does not establish unequal compensation or displacement of domestic nurses.

So, if the displacement of domestic American-born nurses is not unambiguously supported by the facts, nor is the necessity of importing foreign-born nurses that American-born nurses could fill, where is the pressure coming from to rebuild American Nursing and American Nursing Homes with foreign-born nurses?

Follow the public money grift…

For the casual reader or “doubting Thomas”, note that this is all taking place in Minnesota, the home of massive foreign-born citizen graft and fraud of government and taxpayer program monies.

Now the LeadingAge Minnesota Foundation reports two Minnesota Department of Human Services grants: $934,332 and $750,000, totaling $1,684,332. Its descriptions cover immigrant and refugee workforce programs, including employer guidance, language resources, translation devices, and job fairs.

The foundation receiving those awards and the business subsidiary supporting GCR have distinct roles. Their organizational connections justify examining the spending, but do not establish that the grants paid Kenyan recruits’ immigration or housing costs.

On October 28, I submitted a Minnesota Government Data Practices Act request to DHS for the grant agreements, approved budgets, amendments, expenditure and progress reports, and relevant communications. Those records should help establish what public money was authorized to support and how its use was reported.

Taxpayers deserve to see the results promised for that spending, the people served, and the outcomes delivered… and

Employers should also explain how these initiatives fit alongside efforts to train and retain American-born workers already in their communities, or other States.

And as I have reported in earlier articles on Indian and Chinese company involvement in the recruitment and placement of their nationals in the medical professions (doctors & nurses), and the massive amount of questionable monies being generated for the benefit of these companies and their executives personally, this Minnesota-based foreign-born Kenyan nursing program should be investigated as well for possible fraud and corruption, too, BEFORE it is replicated on a State-by-State basis.

A workforce worth returning to…

The Kenyan nurses pursuing these opportunities are making decisions about their own careers and families. The accountability questions belong with the employers designing recruitment programs, and the public officials setting policy and spending taxpayer/public money.

And we should expect them to address both the immediate need for care, and the conditions that either drive experienced American-born nurses away, or falsely establish a shortage of American-born nurses in the first place. That also means examining staffing, safety, schedules, compensation, and practical help for people ready to return.

When employers build an organized route across an ocean to fill American nursing jobs with foreign-born workers, we must demand to know how much effort they are really putting into the employment route back for nurses already here looking for legitimate working opportunities.

America needs capable nurses and dependable care for its seniors. A stronger workforce begins with understanding why people stay, why they leave, and what would bring them back if there are legitimate shortages. Those are questions worth answering—and answers worth acting on.

It’s time to demand answers from our government, too. Elections have consequences, so where is the Trump Administration Leadership on stopping this Biden initiated American Nurses LAST Program?

By Linda Brickman

The post Recruiting Nurses Abroad Instead of Rebuilding Nursing at Home appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.