EB2 Predictions (Rather Calculations) - 2011

[Spectator]

Whilst it would be great news for EB2-India and China if this is true, I will reserve judgement until the VB is posted on the DOS site.

Mumbai have posted incorrect information before.

The definition of Current is that there are more visas available than demand for them. That patently cannot be the case. There is probably a backlog of around 100k in EB2-IC to date, judging by the current backlogs and 2008-2010 PERM data.

If DOS have made EB2 Current consciously, so that true Demand can be gauged, then why not also make EB3 Current? It does not make sense to only make EB2 Current.

As it stands, this is a disaster for everybody in EB3. The remote possibility that EB3 could receive Spillover if insufficient EB2 cases were available to process to approval at the end of a FY would disappear. The filings from EB2 becoming Current would ensure that nothing can Spillover to EB3 in the foreseeable future.

[qesehmk]

Spec

You are right.
1. Lets take this with guarded optimism that mumbai bulletin is actually true but wait till final one comes out.
2. Current doesn't mean everybody gets GC. It only means those eligible to file 485 can now actually do so.


Whilst it would be great news for EB2-India and China if this is true, I will reserve judgement until the VB is posted on the DOS site.

Mumbai have posted incorrect information before.

The definition of Current is that there are more visas available than demand for them. That patently cannot be the case. There is probably a backlog of around 100k in EB2-IC to date, judging by the current backlogs and 2008-2010 PERM data.

If DOS have made EB2 Current consciously, so that true Demand can be gauged, then why not also make EB3 Current? It does not make sense to only make EB2 Current.

As it stands, this is a disaster for everybody in EB3. The remote possibility that EB3 could receive Spillover if insufficient EB2 cases were available to process to approval at the end of a FY would disappear. The filings from EB2 becoming Current would ensure that nothing can Spillover to EB3 in the foreseeable future.

[Pundit Arjun]

The Feb bulletin is out : http://travel.state.gov/visa/bulletin/bulletin_5228.html

Yup, another mistake from the Mumbai Consulate website.

[TexDBoy]

Ya ... why do they lift our spirits and then dampen them. Cannot they get it right.

[Spectator]

Spec

You are right.
1. Lets take this with guarded optimism that mumbai bulletin is actually true but wait till final one comes out.
2. Current doesn't mean everybody gets GC. It only means those eligible to file 485 can now actually do so.
1. Well, we know now that Mumbai have got it wrong again.

Once is an accident. After that it starts to feel as if someone there has a warped sense of humor.

2. That is not my definition. It is a precis of the one give by DOS in the OPERATION OF THE IMMIGRANT NUMERICAL CONTROL SYSTEM document.


If there are sufficient numbers (of Visas) in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered "Current". For example: If the monthly allocation target is 3,000 and we only have demand for 1,000 applicants the category can be "Current”.

Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be "oversubscribed" and a visa availability cut-off date is established.

The cut-off date is the priority date of the first documentarily qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a visa number. For example: If the monthly target is 3,000 and we have demand for 8,000 applicants, then we would need to establish a cut-off date so that only 3,000 numbers would be allocated. In this case, the cut-off would be the priority date of the 3,001st applicant.
So, the Cut Off Date shouldn't be made Current solely to allow filing of applications - there should be Visa numbers available for them.

The VO don't always operate EXACTLY according to those rules, but close enough.

[qesehmk]

Stuff happens. Somebody fat-fingered in Mumbai. Can't help.

Even if were turned true, this wouldnt actually have helped clear backlog though. It would have allowed those waiting to file 485 would've allowed them to.



Ya ... why do they lift our spirits and then dampen them. Cannot they get it right.

[arorasa]

So EB2 China moved by 8 days compared to last month. Does that tell us anything?

[qesehmk]

It confirms that there is no Qly spillover. The logic being - 1 month equals roughly 250 visas max for a country. So if in one month date is only moving 8 days then the country has demand about 1k per month. If you look at 485 inventory china has about 600-800 per month. If there were spillover we would see much faster movement for china or India. Given that India itself is still and china is not moving confirms lack of Qly spillover.

Which again means that Jun-Sep 11 is when the action will be.


So EB2 China moved by 8 days compared to last month. Does that tell us anything?

[parsvnath]

Inv Stats Released for Jan 2011

http://www.uscis.gov/statistics/Employment%20Based%20I-485%20Pending%20Inventory%20as%20of%20January%2005 %202011.pdf

[kd2008]

http://www.uscis.gov/statistics/Employment%20Based%20I-485%20Pending%20Inventory%20as%20of%20January%2005 %202011.pdf

[parsvnath]

Q,

Can you see if this inv report changes anything in your model and update the initial segment?

Thanks,

[qesehmk]

KD / Parsv

Thanks a ton. Really appreciate the initiative. Here are some quick comments and I will update our model by late tonight.

#1 Pls note the report specifically says that all inventory at field offices is included. This is a huge plus - since this means there is no dark demand anymore. Something that we have been concerned about. This is especially more important to EB3 where judging total demand was very difficult because we were not sure how many additional demand was at field offices that was not counted in 485 inventory.
#2 For EB2 the numbers almost look unbelievable. The total demand through Dec 07 seems to be 35K. If we assume that through Q1 10K were used. That still leaves 30K to be applied in future. Then if we were to assume that the fall-down-up from EB5/1 to EB2 will be sufficient to cover any new ROW-EB2 demand (which is a very fair assumption) then it is painting a very rosy picture of EB2 getting cleared through May 2007. We will know better when we put it through our model.

Meanwhile Spec Teddy and other gurus.... pls feel free to jump in.


http://www.uscis.gov/statistics/Employment%20Based%20I-485%20Pending%20Inventory%20as%20of%20January%2005 %202011.pdf

[parsvnath]

Q,

I partially agree with you on 1. This is my reason. This change is mainly because of a interiem memo that came out couple of days ago..Since this memo is hardly effective for 12 days, i am not quite confident all the transfers to the TSC has happened yet. But eventually it will. It might take another inv report before we get good grasp on the dark demand. Let me know what you think
-----

Purpose
This Policy Memorandum (PM) provides USCIS offices with instructions for handling regressed
visa number Adjustment of Status cases (employment-based and family-based) interviewed at
USCIS field offices on or after January 1, 2011. This memorandum:
• Standardizes the handling of visa-regressed cases throughout USCIS field offices
nationwide;
• Eliminates the need for USCIS field offices to request allocation of a visa number for an
otherwise eligible applicant for whom a visa number is unavailable at the time of
interview;
• Centralizes the storage of each case type at designated locations;
• Facilitates the collection of performance data to enable generation of statistical reports
and to improve case tracking and inventory control of visa regressed cases; and
• Offers better visibility to the Department of State (DOS) Visa Office of USCIS inventory
levels so that they can better plan and manage the movement of priority dates displayed
within their monthly visa bulletin.
This PM also provides specific instructions regarding the handling of regressed visa number
cases for which USCIS field offices have already requested, but not yet received, allocated visa
numbers.

----------

[qesehmk]

Certainly. What you say sounds reasonable.


Q,

I partially agree with you on 2. This is my reason. This change is mainly because of a interiem memo that came out couple of days..Since this memo is hardly effective for 12 days, i am not quite confident all the transfers to the TSC has happened yet. But eventually it will. It might take another inv report before we get good grasp on the dark demand. Let me know what you think
-----

[srinivasj]

Hello Qesehmk,
I accidently found this forum on google search..cant beleive you have created a new forum for yourself..Hatsoff..Glad I was able to find it..
Regards,
Srini

[qesehmk]

Srini,
There were too many restrictions on referring to data sources at the other site. So thought I might as well start something like this. It doesn't cost too much. Only 500 dollars so far. But the freedom to say what you want to say is worth it!! Plus I enjoy doing this because all of us are in the same boat. So we might as well help each other and get some clarity.
Welcome to forum!
Q


Hello Qesehmk,
I accidently found this forum on google search..cant beleive you have created a new forum for yourself..Hatsoff..Glad I was able to find it..
Regards,
Srini

[Spectator]

KD / Parsv

Thanks a ton. Really appreciate the initiative. Here are some quick comments and I will update our model by late tonight.

#1 Pls note the report specifically says that all inventory at field offices is included. This is a huge plus - since this means there is no dark demand anymore. Something that we have been concerned about. This is especially more important to EB3 where judging total demand was very difficult because we were not sure how many additional demand was at field offices that was not counted in 485 inventory.
#2 For EB2 the numbers almost look unbelievable. The total demand through Dec 07 seems to be 35K. If we assume that through Q1 10K were used. That still leaves 30K to be applied in future. Then if we were to assume that the fall-down-up from EB5/1 to EB2 will be sufficient to cover any new ROW-EB2 demand (which is a very fair assumption) then it is painting a very rosy picture of EB2 getting cleared through May 2007. We will know better when we put it through our model.

Meanwhile Spec Teddy and other gurus.... pls feel free to jump in.
Whoa there! I think you are jumping the gun without fully considering what the Field Office figures represent. :)

The Field Office figure, now included in the USCIS Inventory, only represent those cases where an interview has taken place and an approval would have taken place but for retrogression. That is, they have been pre-adjudicated.

They were still known to DOS previously, since under the old system, the Field Office requested a Visa for the PD.

It does mean that the USCIS Report should now contain all pre-adjudicated applications where they were handled by USCIS. Previously, the retrogressed Field Office cases remained there after interview until they could be approved and were therefore not included in the Inventory.

There are two things the USCIS Inventory DOESN'T contain pertaining to Field Offices.

a) If, when the interview took place at the Field Office, the PD was Current, the Field Office approved the case and requested a Visa from IVAMS.

That is still the case, so the level of "invisible" demand to DOS still remains, as the first they will know about it is when the Visa number is requested. It will not have been shown in the USCIS Inventory.

b) The USCIS Inventory only contains cases where the interview has taken place.

There are an unknown and unknowable number of cases at Field Offices where the interview has not yet taken place.

What we might speculate on, is that interviews are probably conducted for cases which are relatively close to becoming Current i.e they would try to conduct them in ascending PD order.

It is conceivable that there are a large number of cases with later PDs that have not yet been interviewed, so the real demand to Aug 2007 under USCIS can still not be gauged with any accuracy.

We can only say what the minimum demand is for China and India from USCIS.

This is probably only really a factor for EB3, as I don't believe EB2 has a very large number of Field Office cases.


We can't infer anything about EB2-ROW from the Inventory figures in terms of total approvals.

All we can say is that the pending figure of around 8k represents a snapshot of the work in progress. It is about the same as it was in October 2010 and much higher than in May 2010. I won't make any inferences from that fact.

I really can't agree with your analysis in point #2.

If the full 10 k (actually nearer 11k) from Q1 have indeed been used, then EB2-ROW would be on course to use its full allocation. They would consume a further 21k in the following 3 quarters.

In fact, it is not possible to know how many cases have been approved prior to the Report. Whatever the figure still to be approved, I believe it is higher than the numbers available from EB1 and EB5 spillover.

What we can say from the USCIS Inventory figures is that in the first three months of the FY, EB2-India backlog remained constant at c. 24.5k.

So, despite 3 months worth of Visa numbers (and probably above the 250 per month), EB2 Indian numbers have not moved, which is a net increase in the backlog.

That will actually make the forecast slightly worse, but not by a significant amount.

[veni001]

Not only that, refer to the Annual NVC pending list updated on 11/01/2010 at the following link, which shows Eb2 applications 6,738 pending at various field offices.
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/WaitingListItem.pdf

[qesehmk]

Take it easy. I alreaddy conceded above. Field offices are no different than service centers when it comes to the so called dark demand. Even service centers will have some ROW applications that are not included in the inveotyr. But for our purpose we have to put the peg somewhere. Over time most of the dark demand from field offices will be visible which will be a great thing esp for EB3.

It is wrong to say that the dark demand was known under old system precisely because they were not known until a visa number was requested.

Regarding analysis I will cover it in a separate post.


Whoa there! I think you are jumping the gun without fully considering what the Field Office figures represent. :)

The Field Office figure, now included in the USCIS Inventory, only represent those cases where an interview has taken place and an approval would have taken place but for retrogression. That is, they have been pre-adjudicated.

They were still known to DOS previously, since under the old system, the Field Office requested a Visa for the PD.

It does mean that the USCIS Report should now contain all pre-adjudicated applications where they were handled by USCIS. Previously, the retrogressed Field Office cases remained there after interview until they could be approved and were therefore not included in the Inventory.

There are two things the USCIS Inventory DOESN'T contain pertaining to Field Offices.

a) If, when the interview took place at the Field Office, the PD was Current, the Field Office approved the case and requested a Visa from IVAMS.

That is still the case, so the level of "invisible" demand to DOS still remains, as the first they will know about it is when the Visa number is requested. It will not have been shown in the USCIS Inventory.

b) The USCIS Inventory only contains cases where the interview has taken place.

There are an unknown and unknowable number of cases at Field Offices where the interview has not yet taken place.

What we might speculate on, is that interviews are probably conducted for cases which are relatively close to becoming Current i.e they would try to conduct them in ascending PD order.

It is conceivable that there are a large number of cases with later PDs that have not yet been interviewed, so the real demand to Aug 2007 under USCIS can still not be gauged with any accuracy.

We can only say what the minimum demand is for China and India from USCIS.

This is probably only really a factor for EB3, as I don't believe EB2 has a very large number of Field Office cases.


We can't infer anything about EB2-ROW from the Inventory figures in terms of total approvals.

All we can say is that the pending figure of around 8k represents a snapshot of the work in progress. It is about the same as it was in October 2010 and much higher than in May 2010. I won't make any inferences from that fact.

I really can't agree with your analysis in point #2.

If the full 10 k (actually nearer 11k) from Q1 have indeed been used, then EB2-ROW would be on course to use its full allocation. They would consume a further 21k in the following 3 quarters.

In fact, it is not possible to know how many cases have been approved prior to the Report. Whatever the figure still to be approved, I believe it is higher than the numbers available from EB1 and EB5 spillover.

What we can say from the USCIS Inventory figures is that in the first three months of the FY, EB2-India backlog remained constant at c. 24.5k.

So, despite 3 months worth of Visa numbers (and probably above the 250 per month), EB2 Indian numbers have not moved, which is a net increase in the backlog.

That will actually make the forecast slightly worse, but not by a significant amount.

[qesehmk]

Guys ... I am sorry for being late. Too much swamped by work.

But here is the initial picture that is seen. (Updating the header will take some time because it involves a lot of calculations).

Overall EB2 reduced by 2K. ROW reduced by 1K. EB2-I increasd by 0.5K (which means 1K of conversions in Q1). Assuming 10K was applied (Q1 allocation) to EB2, this establishes max ROW new demand in Q1 at 7K. Which translates to 28K ROW full year demand - implying 6K SOFAD.
EB5/4 is on its way to give 5-6K SOFAD.
EB1 is now the dark horse. IF you look at the inventory report. 1K new demand is seen for EB1. That would mean 12K per year - which seems way artificially low. Even if we assume twice that demand @24K per year. EB1 should give 16K to EB2. So 6+5+16 = 27K SOFAD - should put us on path to March 07 +- 2 months (which pulls Q out of his GC misery - how convenient!!).

Overall as we have observed in the past - EB2-ROW and EB1-all is key to EB2 resolution. EB2ROW has lots of data that can be studied to understand its demand. The max we can expect from ROW-EB2 in 2011 seems to be 6K. However EB1 is difficult to predict since there is no labor data. The 2010 full year DHS report is also not yet published which would give us some insight into how much EB1 really gave in 2010. According to CO there was none in 2010.

If that is true and in 2011 EB1 repeats the same - tehn I must say EB2 overall can't progress beyond sep-06. (sorry .... don't shoot the messenger),

Fortunately, data points to different results. As I said, EB1 new demand per month seems to average 1K and you can double that to account for instant approvals that don't even appear in inventory.

So bottomline: The forecast doesn't change significantly. It will be worthwhile to spend much more time understanding EB1 which seems to hold a bigger key to EB2 resolution.

[Spectator]

Take it easy. I alreaddy conceded above. Field offices are no different than service centers when it comes to the so called dark demand. Even service centers will have some ROW applications that are not included in the inveotyr. But for our purpose we have to put the peg somewhere. Over time most of the dark demand from field offices will be visible which will be a great thing esp for EB3.

It is wrong to say that the dark demand was known under old system precisely because they were not known until a visa number was requested.

Regarding analysis I will cover it in a separate post.It was not intended that way. It was why a put a smiley there. I guess inner thoughts don't always translate onto the written page. Apologies if you took any offence.

I wasn't saying that dark demand was known under the old system - in fact quite the opposite. What I was trying to say (poorly perhaps) was that the new system doesn't uncover it either.

Under the old system, a visa request for retrogressed cases was made to DOS by the Field Office when the case was pre-adjudicated, so DOS were aware of the numbers. Those cases then remained at the Field Office until they could be approved. Thus, they were not part of the USCIS Inventory.

Under the new system, these cases are returned to TSC upon pre-adjudication, the visa is now requested by TSC and they are also shown in the USCIS Inventory, which is a great leap forward, since they are now also visible to us. The numbers for EB3-ROW show how important that data is.

The dark demand to DOS was always cases that were Current when approved at the Field Office.

From reading the memo, the way these are dealt with has not changed. The first DOS will know about them is when they are approved and a visa is requested by the Field Office.

They will remain as dark as they were.

Possibly we were talking at cross purposes, since there is dark demand unknown to the USCIS Inventory and dark demand that is unknown to DOS. Much of the first category has now been illuminated.

Good luck with the analysis.

[qesehmk]

Don't worry about apologies. None are required.

I guess what has changed under the new system that USCIS is emphasizing that pre-adjudication takes place even at DOs.


It was not intended that way. It was why a put a smiley there. I guess inner thoughts don't always translate onto the written page. Apologies if you took any offence.

I wasn't saying that dark demand was known under the old system - in fact quite the opposite. What I was trying to say (poorly perhaps) was that the new system doesn't uncover it either.

Under the old system, a visa request for retrogressed cases was made to DOS by the Field Office when the case was pre-adjudicated, so DOS were aware of the numbers. Those cases then remained at the Field Office until they could be approved. Thus, they were not part of the USCIS Inventory.

Under the new system, these cases are returned to TSC upon pre-adjudication, the visa is now requested by TSC and they are also shown in the USCIS Inventory, which is a great leap forward, since they are now also visible to us. The numbers for EB3-ROW show how important that data is.

The dark demand to DOS was always cases that were Current when approved at the Field Office.

From reading the memo, the way these are dealt with has not changed. The first DOS will know about them is when they are approved and a visa is requested by the Field Office.

They will remain as dark as they were.

Possibly we were talking at cross purposes, since there is dark demand unknown to the USCIS Inventory and dark demand that is unknown to DOS. Much of the first category has now been illuminated.

Good luck with the analysis.

[bieber]

Q

earlier in this thread, you mentioned last year EB2ROW/EB1 quota was used to clear backlogs and this year you are expecting more SOFAD if not atleast same. is this changed?

my PD is 2008Aug1, EB2I, just wanted to know in ur opinion if i will get a chance to file for 485 in july-sep 2012 (2011 is even better :) )

[qesehmk]

veni ... welcome to forum and thanks. NVC demand is already factored in our model.


Not only that, refer to the Annual NVC pending list updated on 11/01/2010 at the following link, which shows Eb2 applications 6,738 pending at various field offices.
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/WaitingListItem.pdf

Spec ... you have a wonderful insight and analytical mind. Once again ... I don't think I took any offense and so no apologies are required. Appreciate your views.


It was not intended that way. It was why a put a smiley there. I guess inner thoughts don't always translate onto the written page. Apologies if you took any offence.



bieber, earlier I was bullish because I thought we will see half the ROW-EB2 demand in 2011 as in 2010 - primarily because in 2010 there was a PERM approval surge. But going into 2011 ROW EB2 continues to have strong demand. Coupled this with the fact that this year EB has 10K less to do with, isn't a very comforting thought. However I still think that EB2 will see significant SOFAD. At least 12K. At max 36K. So 24K seems a very tempting mathematical number!! Right? Just kidding ... but if 24K or 28K materializes then thats good enough to carry through January-Mar 07. Whether it will materialize in my opinion will largely depend on EB1 rather than ROW-EB2 because I am quite convinced that ROW-EB2 is not going to yield a lot.


Q
earlier in this thread, you mentioned last year EB2ROW/EB1 quota was used to clear backlogs and this year you are expecting more SOFAD if not atleast same. is this changed?
my PD is 2008Aug1, EB2I, just wanted to know in ur opinion if i will get a chance to file for 485 in july-sep 2012 (2011 is even better :) )

[Spectator]

EB1 is now the dark horse. IF you look at the inventory report. 1K new demand is seen for EB1. That would mean 12K per year - which seems way artificially low. Even if we assume twice that demand @24K per year. EB1 should give 16K to EB2. So 6+5+16 = 27K SOFAD - should put us on path to March 07 +- 2 months (which pulls Q out of his GC misery - how convenient!!).

Overall as we have observed in the past - EB2-ROW and EB1-all is key to EB2 resolution. EB2ROW has lots of data that can be studied to understand its demand. The max we can expect from ROW-EB2 in 2011 seems to be 6K. However EB1 is difficult to predict since there is no labor data. The 2010 full year DHS report is also not yet published which would give us some insight into how much EB1 really gave in 2010. According to CO there was none in 2010.

If that is true and in 2011 EB1 repeats the same - tehn I must say EB2 overall can't progress beyond sep-06. (sorry .... don't shoot the messenger).

So bottomline: The forecast doesn't change significantly. It will be worthwhile to spend much more time understanding EB1 which seems to hold a bigger key to EB2 resolution.


However I still think that EB2 will see significant SOFAD. At least 12K. At max 36K. So 24K seems a very tempting mathematical number!! Right? Just kidding ... but if 24K or 28K materializes then thats good enough to carry through January-Mar 07. Whether it will materialize in my opinion will largely depend on EB1 rather than ROW-EB2 because I am quite convinced that ROW-EB2 is not going to yield a lot.Q,

Thanks for crunching the numbers and giving us your insight.

I pretty much agree with everything you've said, particularly that EB1 holds the key.

Forgive me if I talk aloud and generally vent my frustration about EB1. Who knows, some of it might even be useful!

As you pointed out, there is a only a single source of information about EB1 progress - and that is Trackitt.

I have to admit that, for EB1, I am becoming quite distrustful of these figures. Let me explain at least part of the reason.

a) The % that Trackitt primary case approvals in EB1 represent of actual approvals is extremely low.

In FY2008, it represented just 0.67%, in FY2009 just 1.24% and probably around 0.86% in FY2010.

As you can see, the % has varied widely. In fact, using the FY2009 figure for FY2010 Trackitt approvals predicted a figure of 28.4k. We can deduce that it was far higher than that.

b) The representation of EB1 cases on Trackitt is very skewed.

Whilst in reality EB1-ROW (Countries other than C,I, M & P) accounts for 65% of approvals, the representation on Trackit is just 30%.

Conversely for EB1-India, where actual approvals account for 15% of the total, the Trackitt representation is over 50%.

c) Trackitt does not properly represent EB1C.

EB1C approvals represent 60% of all EB1 approvals in reality, so they are a major contributor to the overall numbers.

In FY2008, the Trackitt representation was 37.5%, in FY2009 it leapt to 49.9%, but in FY2010 it dropped to 33.3%.

It is possible that approvals as a % really did drop in FY2010 and we will know when the DHS Yearbook is published. Alternatively, EB1C just aren't adding their cases any more due to the negative comments that group gets. It is impossible to tell, but it leaves the possibility that Trackitt numbers under-represent the true numbers.

I realize that is the nature of the Trackitt beast, but nonetheless, with such small % representation, it can lead to widely varying figures per year and the major consumers are very under represented.

I was in this quandary last year. Whilst Trackitt was saying that EB1 approvals were low, historical trends and gut instinct told me that EB1 was likely to consume most of its allocation. I estimated 38k and it was probably more than that.

The same factors are in play for me now looking at FY2011. I can't really see EB1 getting less than 35k, probably 38k and possibly 40k. As I said, it is gut instinct as much as anything else. End of rant.

In my own model, I have a figure of 22-23k SOFAD but because of EB1 it has a wide error margin. I don't think it is so out of line with your own prediction.

You said earlier that:

Just kidding ... but if 24K or 28K materializes then thats good enough to carry through January-Mar 07.

I am struggling to reach those dates with those figures.

Taking into account changes due to the January 2011 USCIS Inventory, the revised number of USCIS cases for China and India at the beginning of the FY would be 36.5k.

To reach the end of December needs 21k from the USCIS Inventory. Once you add on Porting at 4k and other allowances for new applications, CP cases etc, it needs 28k SOFAD to clear December 2006, give or take a k.

Similarly, I calculate that to clear March 2007 would need 32.5k SOFAD.

24k SOFAD would allow movement towards the end of November 2006 and 28k SOFAD allows the end of December 2006 as I said above.

I seem to remember both Teddy and I came to the same conclusion about movement, but you were more optimistic. I don't know if this is the same issue. I certainly don't want to pick a fight over it. :):)

Happy number crunching and thanks again for your efforts. They are much appreciated.

[veni001]

veni ... welcome to forum and thanks. NVC demand is already factored in our model.

Q,
Is it safe to assume that there are about 700 EB3-I to EB2-I porting in Q1 FY 2011.
10-01-2010 inventory = 24,254
01-05-2011 Inventory = 24,628
Q1 Visa approved ( about 700, assume 50% regular and 50% ported)
======================
Total Porting = 374+350= 724
======================:confused:

[qesehmk]

How about following formula?

Total Porting = Q1 EB2I Quota + Increase in Inventory in Q1
= 750 + 374 = 1124

That gives us a good sense that for full year total porting is going to be around 4-5K.


Q,
Is it safe to assume that there are about 700 EB3-I to EB2-I porting in Q1 FY 2011.
10-01-2010 inventory = 24,254
01-05-2011 Inventory = 24,628
Q1 Visa approved ( about 700, assume 50% regular and 50% ported)
======================
Total Porting = 374+350= 724
======================:confused:

[TeddyKoochu]

Parvsnath - Your observation is correct that the district/local office demand is now in the inventory thanks to the recent memo.
Spectator – I agree with your observation that the district office demand is still not fully compiled on the inventory yet as you say that it’s early days. To add to that the weather has not been great in many parts of the country which may also contribute to the update not being completed. The next inventory would give an exact picture.
Spec & Q – Spec I believe that EB1 as Q states holds the key for our fortunes. It maybe true for yester years that EB1C used to make up 60% of EB1, while you are correct that negative comments and generalizations keep people from this category away but here we are talking in terms of percentages. Ideally even in the midst of a recession the EB1A and EB1B demand should be the same however even they are coming down. EB1C figures have also been declining I think the whip is being cracked on this fairly hard there was a recent post on Trackitt where it looked like the GC of a USCIS beneficiary was rescinded and the company is under investigation now. However looking at it from another angle not all EB1C filing as is sometimes generalized is fraudulent there are people who have more than 100 reports or manage multimillion USD value project they should get it. I believe the org chart RFE’s are on rise and comparing the EB1C approvals it looks like they are taking 10 months just for I140 which is way higher than any other category that’s is why EB1 inventory is high. All of us have a slightly different interpretation of EB2 row however for EB2 ROW there is some good data available on Trackitt, I do however see an acceleration of EB2 ROW approvals in December. Another reason if I may say for EB1 decline would be if somebody is from ROW it makes no sense to file as EB1 because the yardstick and standards are much higher it makes sense to go through labor filing which is now fairly quick anyway. If you look at Trackitt data looks like almost all the EB1 representation is from India, Trackitt is fairly popular with ROW folks so this skew does indicate something.
I have a question for everybody why are there more EB3 cases in local offices, my understanding is that a case should go to the local office when they want to verify something individually or if somebody has some kind of adverse record. So in this light EB2 and EB3 should be fairly even. The only reason I can think off is that EB2 inventory is less 13 months May 2006 to Jul 2007 so lesser number of people while EB3 is larger. Historically the local offices had the bulk of the 24I cases but the inventory for these cases is low now the only explanation could be that some people filed later for 245I protection. The CP demand yes for 245I will be high as once again FB2 is retrogressed so these individuals will take recourse to I824.
Friends Iam working on my model after plugging in the new inventory, my apologies its taking more, work schedule is busier than usual. However the results should be similar, Iam working to incorporate all the feedback I received from everyone on the forum. Good luck to everybody.

[veni001]

How about following formula?

Total Porting = Q1 EB2I Quota + Increase in Inventory in Q1
= 750 + 374 = 1124

That gives us a good sense that for full year total porting is going to be around 4-5K.

It could be but what about EB3-ROW to EB2-ROW another 4-5K?

[qesehmk]

Great point. I do not know how mcuh for ROW. A gut feel will say may be an equivalent. And I would say may be that is the reason EB2ROW is continuing to show strong new demand. In other words as long as we get a sense of EB2ROW new demand (which it seems is at 28K full year) then we don't really care how much is because of conversions.

For EB2 it matters because porting means EB2I dates progressing slower than they otherwise would.

p.s. - But to answer your question .. I do not know how much ROW conversion might stand at. A gut feel tells me at least 4-5K. Sure.


It could be but what about EB3-ROW to EB2-ROW another 4-5K?

[Spectator]

How about following formula?

Total Porting = Q1 EB2I Quota + Increase in Inventory in Q1
= 750 + 374 = 1124

That gives us a good sense that for full year total porting is going to be around 4-5K.Q,

I'll take your 1,124 and raise it! Maybe. Perhaps. Sort of. LOL.

I know you are aware how complex this area is, so the following is mainly for the benefit of others.

The EB2-I Inventory did increase by 374 from October to January, but there were also approvals, so the real rise is greater than that.

We could say the rise was 757+374, but I think that overstates it.

What we can say is that reductions in months prior to May 2006 were probably due to approvals, whilst reductions after May 2006 cannot have been approvals since they were not Current.

Removing reductions pre May 2006 gives an adjusted increase in the Inventory of 634, so cases that could either be Porting, new applications or transfer from DO would be 757 + 634 = 1,391 or 5,564 cases for the year.

That figure is for all dates. Probably what is of more interest is how it will affect Cut Off Date movement in FY2011.

On the assumption that EB2-I doesn't move beyond December 2006, this would be 525 cases, so 1,282 per quarter or 5,128 per year.

All the above is on the assumption that the Visa Office used all of the 27% or 757 visas for EB2-I that they are statutorily allowed.

There is some evidence, from data DOS released as part of the EB3 Chinese Class Action Suit, that this is not the case.

Whilst China is shown separately, India is not, so the following figures are for all Countries except China in EB3. I wouldn't expect EB2 to be much different.

In FY2008 the VO used (allocated minus returns) 18.8% of the total visas for the year in Q1.

In FY2009 the VO used 47.8% of the visas in Q1.

In FY2010 (assuming all visas were used) then 36.5% were allocated in Q1.

That gives quite a wide spread. Using those percentages gives the following yearly totals for Porting, new applications and DO transfers up to the end of December 2006:

18.8% - 4,208
27.0% - 5,128
36.5% - 6,192
47.8% - 7,460

Because it is impossible to tell what the VO has done in FY2011, I am going to stick with 27% as the simplest course. That still happens to give a figure that is broadly in line with 4,000 Porting (a little less actually).

[TeddyKoochu]

How about following formula?

Total Porting = Q1 EB2I Quota + Increase in Inventory in Q1
= 750 + 374 = 1124

That gives us a good sense that for full year total porting is going to be around 4-5K.


Q,

I'll take your 1,124 and raise it! Maybe. Perhaps. Sort of. LOL.

I know you are aware how complex this area is, so the following is mainly for the benefit of others.

The EB2-I Inventory did increase by 374 from October to January, but there were also approvals, so the real rise is greater than that.

We could say the rise was 757+374, but I think that overstates it.

What we can say is that reductions in months prior to May 2006 were probably due to approvals, whilst reductions after May 2006 cannot have been approvals since they were not Current.

Removing reductions pre May 2006 gives an adjusted increase in the Inventory of 634, so cases that could either be Porting, new applications or transfer from DO would be 757 + 634 = 1,391 or 5,564 cases for the year.

That figure is for all dates. Probably what is of more interest is how it will affect Cut Off Date movement in FY2011.

On the assumption that EB2-I doesn't move beyond December 2006, this would be 525 cases, so 1,282 per quarter or 5,128 per year.

All the above is on the assumption that the Visa Office used all of the 27% or 757 visas for EB2-I that they are statutorily allowed.

There is some evidence, from data DOS released as part of the EB3 Chinese Class Action Suit, that this is not the case.

Whilst China is shown separately, India is not, so the following figures are for all Countries except China in EB3. I wouldn't expect EB2 to be much different.

In FY2008 the VO used (allocated minus returns) 18.8% of the total visas for the year in Q1.

In FY2009 the VO used 47.8% of the visas in Q1.

In FY2010 (assuming all visas were used) then 36.5% were allocated in Q1.

That gives quite a wide spread. Using those percentages gives the following yearly totals for Porting, new applications and DO transfers up to the end of December 2006:

18.8% - 4,208
27.0% - 5,128
36.5% - 6,192
47.8% - 7,460

Because it is impossible to tell what the VO has done in FY2011, I am going to stick with 27% as the simplest course. That still happens to give a figure that is broadly in line with 4,000 Porting (a little less actually).




Q/Spec, I did a kind of month to month compare of the inventory for Eb2-I and C. Looks like porting is happening for India only, the figure for China is down even in the non-current months. Your formula looks reasonable however we should also put in the PWMB and withdrawals and denials which maybe hard to compute. The PWMB should be higher than the withdrawals so this will in fact lower the total and make your calculation look conservative. I still firmly believe that porting will be well within 6K.

[TeddyKoochu]

Great point. I do not know how mcuh for ROW. A gut feel will say may be an equivalent. And I would say may be that is the reason EB2ROW is continuing to show strong new demand. In other words as long as we get a sense of EB2ROW new demand (which it seems is at 28K full year) then we don't really care how much is because of conversions.

For EB2 it matters because porting means EB2I dates progressing slower than they otherwise would.

p.s. - But to answer your question .. I do not know how much ROW conversion might stand at. A gut feel tells me at least 4-5K. Sure.

Q/Spec,Guys if you look at Trackitt approvals for ROW they are consistently 2009 and 2010 only there is hardly any porting happening here. A reason for EB2 ROW to increase would be that it makes no sense to file in EB1 especially since labor approvals are fast now. However Trackitt trend shows that EB2 ROW is 66% of last year despite everything.

[qesehmk]

Teddy
Since EB3ROW is backlogged just like EB3IC.. it makes sense that there must be some porting going on within ROW from EB3->2.
You are right 2->1 doesn't make sense for ROW.
The question is how big ROW porting is? But another question is why are we asking this question? Because what matters is as long as ROW-EB2 total consumption is reasonably understood ... our purpose is served. So within EB2ROW the split between "pure new EB2 demand vs conversions/porting related demand" is less important.




Guys if you look at Trackitt approvals for ROW they are consistently 2009 and 2010 only there is hardly any porting happening here. A reason for EB2 ROW to increase would be that it makes no sense to file in EB1 especially since labor approvals are fast now. However Trackitt trend shows that EB2 ROW is 66% of last year despite everything.

[Spectator]

Spec & Q – Spec I believe that EB1 as Q states holds the key for our fortunes. It maybe true for yester years that EB1C used to make up 60% of EB1, while you are correct that negative comments and generalizations keep people from this category away but here we are talking in terms of percentages.
Nice to see you back Teddy. I've missed your contribution.

Yesteryear is all recent years, including FY2009. I agree that it might well have fallen in FY2010, which is why I eagerly await publication of the DHS Yearbook of Immigration Statistics for 2010.


Another reason if I may say for EB1 decline would be if somebody is from ROW it makes no sense to file as EB1 because the yardstick and standards are much higher it makes sense to go through labor filing which is now fairly quick anyway.I agree that the quicker time to get through PERM and I-140 means the advantages of EB1 to EB2 are somewhat diminished.

Nonetheless, ROW still accounted for 65% of approvals in EB1 in FY2009. It will be interesting to see if this has changed in FY2010.


If you look at Trackitt data looks like almost all the EB1 representation is from India, Trackitt is fairly popular with ROW folks so this skew does indicate something."Fairly popular" is just relative. Trackitt does seem to be the most popular forum for ROW folks, but the predominant population is still Indian.


I have a question for everybody why are there more EB3 cases in local offices, my understanding is that a case should go to the local office when they want to verify something individually or if somebody has some kind of adverse record. So in this light EB2 and EB3 should be fairly even. The only reason I can think off is that EB2 inventory is less 13 months May 2006 to Jul 2007 so lesser number of people while EB3 is larger. Historically the local offices had the bulk of the 24I cases but the inventory for these cases is low now the only explanation could be that some people filed later for 245I protection. The CP demand yes for 245I will be high as once again FB2 is retrogressed so these individuals will take recourse to I824. I think your explanation is probably correct. On sheer weight of numbers, there should be more EB3 than EB2 cases, but not almost exclusively.

As you said, 245i has been a reason and that would probably favor an EB3 bias.

Since EB2-ROW has always been Current, I guess that any interviews deemed necessary are conducted very quickly (well, quick by USCIS standards anyway :))


Friends I am working on my model after plugging in the new inventory, my apologies its taking more, work schedule is busier than usual. However the results should be similar, I am working to incorporate all the feedback I received from everyone on the forum. Good luck to everybody.I'm looking forward to the results.

[TeddyKoochu]

Spec all replies Inline

Nice to see you back Teddy. I've missed your contribution.

Yesteryear is all recent years, including FY2009. I agree that it might well have fallen in FY2010, which is why I eagerly await publication of the DHS Yearbook of Immigration Statistics for 2010.

There was an AILA report which we can assume as accurate it said EB2-I got 20K and EB2-C got 6.5K. Now remove 6K from this because its their individual quota for the year. nother report said EB5=7K. So what is left is 13.5K that will have to be spilit between EB2 ROW and EB2. Since EB1 in 2009 not only consumed its own cap but ate in EB5 I assume EB2 ROW was the one that gave us more. For all my calculations based on my gut feeling I say that EB2 ROW = 10K and EB1 = 3.5K.
I agree that the quicker time to get through PERM and I-140 means the advantages of EB1 to EB2 are somewhat diminished.

Nonetheless, ROW still accounted for 65% of approvals in EB1 in FY2009. It will be interesting to see if this has changed in FY2010.

"Fairly popular" is just relative. Trackitt does seem to be the most popular forum for ROW folks, but the predominant population is still Indian.
Yes you are right there way too many of us Indians waiting, probably since ROW accounted for 65% of EB1 approvals the what we see on Trackitt is the tip or part of the iceberg.
I think your explanation is probably correct. On sheer weight of numbers, there should be more EB3 than EB2 cases, but not almost exclusively.

As you said, 245i has been a reason and that would probably favor an EB3 bias.

Since EB2-ROW has always been Current, I guess that any interviews deemed necessary are conducted very quickly (well, quick by USCIS standards anyway :))
Thanks for confirming, I could not think of anything else, there has been lot of rumours and speculations on district office with these finally being compiled hopefully there will be greater clarity.
I'm looking forward to the results.
Thanks Spec, I will have them soon, but its great to read your posts there is a refreshing clarity and an amazing level of detail.

[Spectator]

Q/Spec, I did a kind of month to month compare of the inventory for Eb2-I and C. Looks like porting is happening for India only, the figure for China is down even in the non-current months. Your formula looks reasonable however we should also put in the PWMB and withdrawals and denials which maybe hard to compute. The PWMB should be higher than the withdrawals so this will in fact lower the total and make your calculation look conservative. I still firmly believe that porting will be well within 6K.Q,

I am saying that my figures include PWMB, so 5,500 would represent 4,000 Porting to me. There is no way to tell whether an addition is due to a Porting case or whether it is a new derivative application. Either way, it adds one case.

Other than when the figure has reduced after May 2006, I don't have any clue how to derive a figure for denials / withdrawals. Even that has limitations, because the figures are net and we don't know how they were derived. I think denial of I-485 should be quite low, but I have no idea what the withdrawal rate might be.

You are correct that denials / withdrawals not already incorporated in the Inventory, would lower my figure.

At the moment, I am thinking that it is only one quarter of data, withdrawals are completely unknown, so perhaps leave the figure alone as representing Porting and PWMB.

[TeddyKoochu]

Teddy
Since EB3ROW is backlogged just like EB3IC.. it makes sense that there must be some porting going on within ROW from EB3->2.
You are right 2->1 doesn't make sense for ROW.
The question is how big ROW porting is? But another question is why are we asking this question? Because what matters is as long as ROW-EB2 total consumption is reasonably understood ... our purpose is served. So within EB2ROW the split between "pure new EB2 demand vs conversions/porting related demand" is less important.

I fully agree with you Q there is not much of a purpose in deducing the ROW porting as long as we can tag and have a ball park for ROW consumption as a whole. However looking at Trackitt I hardly find any case of ROW porting mostly its 2009 or 2010, ROW seems to be reasonable shape and most folks from even 2006 are expecting to make it this year, EB3 ROW crossing Marc 2005 is actually a big milestone. The situation unfortunately for EB3-I is simply terrible. Another factor that I will say is most ROW guys unlike from India are full time and not consulting (Iam also one of them) its hard looks like to convince the company to file a new case and theer is lot of hierarch and red tape to trudge through. IMHO ROW porting should be really less than 1000 that’s my guess.

[TeddyKoochu]

Q,

I am saying that my figures include PWMB, so 5,500 would represent 4,000 Porting to me. There is no way to tell whether an addition is due to a Porting case or whether it is a new derivative application. Either way, it adds one case.

Other than when the figure has reduced after May 2006, I don't have any clue how to derive a figure for denials / withdrawals. Even that has limitations, because the figures are net and we don't know how they were derived. I think denial of I-485 should be quite low, but I have no idea what the withdrawal rate might be.

You are correct that denials / withdrawals not already incorporated in the Inventory, would lower my figure.

At the moment, I am thinking that it is only one quarter of data, withdrawals are completely unknown, so perhaps leave the figure alone as representing Porting and PWMB.


Spec, a much simpler way that I would like to say would be 3 months of consumption has happened for EB2 I/C this would be ~ 1400. Notice China is moving nicely. SOFAD effectively consumed then is 1400. However out of 6000 allocated to porting ~ 1500 has happened but not all cases have seen approvals. If you keep looking at the new inventory every time we can implicitly overcome new demand, porting etc it may not be exact though but the difference will not cause a deviation of more than 1 month to the final outcome.

[qesehmk]

I have a question for everybody why are there more EB3 cases in local offices
Teddy, I think one reason (not the only one) could be that EB3 naturally tends to create more backlog. Now the whole service center philosophy is not so new ...however there are significant cases from pre-service center era where the EB3 dates were so retrogressed that field offices never bothered to report them all to USCIS. Neither USCIS ever thought that it was their mandate to establish full visibility to all cases. Then came the rule of horizontal spillover or fall-across which has now further made the situation worse for EB3. I think these things have contributed to creation of dark demand for EB3 at field offices. ME too believe that EB2 has virtually no dark demand whatsoever.



Q,
I'll take your 1,124 and raise it! Maybe. Perhaps. Sort of. LOL.
I know you are aware how complex this area is, so the following is mainly for the benefit of others.
The EB2-I Inventory did increase by 374 from October to January, but there were also approvals, so the real rise is greater than that.
....

Spec this is quite ANAL!! But that's ok. I guess what I can't digest is your statement that "there were also approvals." . Remember for EB2I since new demand is zero, my formula works perfect to determine portings (save any withdrawals or denials as Teddy pointed out). Its immaterial what year the approvals came from since nothing new is being added to the backlog as far as EB2I is concerned.


Q/Spec, I did a kind of month to month compare of the inventory for Eb2-I and C. Looks like porting is happening for India only, the figure for China is down even in the non-current months. Your formula looks reasonable however we should also put in the PWMB and withdrawals and denials which maybe hard to compute. The PWMB should be higher than the withdrawals so this will in fact lower the total and make your calculation look conservative. I still firmly believe that porting will be well within 6K.
Teddy very good point about withdrawals denials and PWBM. I think this 4-6K we are calculating ... we can call it as a bucket that consists of all adjustments over an above teh base inventory published on 1st Oct. And then we apply this adjustment to any SOFAD received. We don't necessarily need to split hair between how much could be withdrawls pwbm or denials.


Q/Spec,Guys if you look at Trackitt approvals for ROW they are consistently 2009 and 2010 only there is hardly any porting happening here. A reason for EB2 ROW to increase would be that it makes no sense to file in EB1 especially since labor approvals are fast now. However Trackitt trend shows that EB2 ROW is 66% of last year despite everything.
Well ... that observation only confirms that total ROW demand is steady. One reason it could be steady could be because ROW portings are offseting any decrease in ROW new demand (just as an example). That's why I am saying that gauging ROW portings is difficult but more importantly not such a critical thing to understand.

[Spectator]

There was an AILA report which we can assume as accurate it said EB2-I got 20K and EB2-C got 6.5K. Now remove 6K from this because its their individual quota for the year. nother report said EB5=7K. So what is left is 13.5K that will have to be spilit between EB2 ROW and EB2. Since EB1 in 2009 not only consumed its own cap but ate in EB5 I assume EB2 ROW was the one that gave us more. For all my calculations based on my gut feeling I say that EB2 ROW = 10K and EB1 = 3.5K.I think pretty much exactly the same, which is comforting.

Relying on Trackitt data gave EB2-ROW (not including Mexico & Philippines) 24.6k. That meant ROW contributed 6.4k. Mexico & Philippines have traditionally contributed around 3k from their 6k allocation.

From the document I saw, EB5 only had 1.9k approvals, so contributed 8.8k.

China and India contributed their own combined figure of 6k.

That gives SOFAD so far of 6.4 + 3.0 + 8.8 + 6.0 = 24.2k

By process of elimination EB1 would have contributed 2.3k to make up the 26.5k total SOFAD. That implies EB1 approvals were 40.8k in FY2010.

[qesehmk]

We are on the same page! You said exactly what I have in mind.


Q,

I am saying that my figures include PWMB, so 5,500 would represent 4,000 Porting to me. There is no way to tell whether an addition is due to a Porting case or whether it is a new derivative application. Either way, it adds one case.

Other than when the figure has reduced after May 2006, I don't have any clue how to derive a figure for denials / withdrawals. Even that has limitations, because the figures are net and we don't know how they were derived. I think denial of I-485 should be quite low, but I have no idea what the withdrawal rate might be.

You are correct that denials / withdrawals not already incorporated in the Inventory, would lower my figure.

At the moment, I am thinking that it is only one quarter of data, withdrawals are completely unknown, so perhaps leave the figure alone as representing Porting and PWMB.

[qesehmk]

Spec, a much simpler way that I would like to say would be 3 months of consumption has happened for EB2 I/C this would be ~ 1400. Notice China is moving nicely. SOFAD effectively consumed then is 1400. However out of 6000 allocated to porting ~ 1500 has happened but not all cases have seen approvals. If you keep looking at the new inventory every time we can implicitly overcome new demand, porting etc it may not be exact though but the difference will not cause a deviation of more than 1 month to the final outcome.
Teddy ... you probably are already assuming it ... but just wanted to point it out that 6K you arereferring to will arrive over full year rather than in one go at the beginning of the year.

[TeddyKoochu]

Teddy ... you probably are already assuming it ... but just wanted to point it out that 6K you arereferring to will arrive over full year rather than in one go at the beginning of the year.

Q thats what I intended to say 6K is the annual figure and since a quarter has passed 1500 has already happened partly it will be approvals and partly visible in the inventory, we are on the same page.

[Spectator]

Spec this is quite ANAL!! But that's ok. I guess what I can't digest is your statement that "there were also approvals." . Remember for EB2I since new demand is zero, my formula works perfect to determine portings (save any withdrawals or denials as Teddy pointed out). Its immaterial what year the approvals came from since nothing new is being added to the backlog as far as EB2I is concerned.Q,

Not at all. I probably didn't explain it very well.

The 374 increase is the net effect of all the months in the Inventory between Oct and January. Some have risen and some have fallen.

Clearly if there is a rise in the number of cases in a particular month, they are new cases. I don't think we disagree on that.

In months where the figure has fallen, it could be due to one of 2 reasons - either it was a withdrawal/denial or it was due to an approval.

If it was due to an approval, then that number should not be deducted from the number of new cases, since that is expected in the 3 months that have passed.

Say we have 3 months that were Current in October-Dec 2010 and the change in those months between the Inventories was :

100 --- (200) --- 300

The number of NEW cases is NOT 100 - 200 + 300 = 200

It is 100 + 300 = 400

The (200) represents removal of EXISTING cases, not a reduction in NEW cases.

It COULD have been a withdrawal, but we can't tell. On the balance of probability, if the date was Current, it was an approval. If the date wasn't Current, it must have been a withdrawal.

I don't think I can explain it any better than that.

I didn't take offence! I am probably guilty as charged! :D

[Spectator]

Spec, a much simpler way that I would like to say would be 3 months of consumption has happened for EB2 I/C this would be ~ 1400. Notice China is moving nicely. SOFAD effectively consumed then is 1400. However out of 6000 allocated to porting ~ 1500 has happened but not all cases have seen approvals. If you keep looking at the new inventory every time we can implicitly overcome new demand, porting etc it may not be exact though but the difference will not cause a deviation of more than 1 month to the final outcome.Teddy,

Sorry, you've lost me there.

Where did the 1,400 come from?

[TeddyKoochu]

Teddy,

Sorry, you've lost me there.

Where did the 1,400 come from?

2800 (EB2-I) + 2800 (EB2-C) * 25/100 (1 Quarter) = 1400.

[TeddyKoochu]

Month-Year India China PWMB CP "Total
Monthly" "Cumlative
Sum
"
Offset 8500 1000 0 0 9500 9500
May-06 1110 38 100 100 1348 10848
Jun-06 1696 541 100 100 2437 13285
Jul-06 1505 620 100 100 2325 15610
Aug-06 1677 693 100 100 2570 18180
Sep-06 1745 773 100 100 2718 20898
Oct-06 1747 732 100 100 2679 23577
Nov-06 1737 667 100 100 2604 26181
Dec-06 1881 770 200 100 2951 29132
Jan-07 1540 654 200 100 2494 31626
Feb-07 1444 615 200 100 2359 33985
Mar-07 1404 682 200 100 2386 36371
Apr-07 1420 609 200 100 2329 38700
May-07 1070 519 500 100 2189 40889
Jun-07 1272 558 1000 100 2930 43819
Jul-07 1673 1788 2000 100 5561 49380

- In the table above the columns India and china represent the monthly figures from the Jan 2011 Inventory.
- I have assumed a starting offset of 2000 as there were cases which did not see approval last year even though they were current. I have assumed PD porting to be 6000 (Double of what was calculated last year for India). PD porting has now been added to the offset point itself as we will see movement only in the last quarter and I believe that the date won’t cross May 2006 before the last quarter in the absence of any kind of spillover (SOFAD). The offset also includes ~ 750 approvals each for India & China.
- PWMB refers to those who could not file for their 485’s as the labor approval was missed out or they are adding dependants now. These values are by my gut feeling another point to note is that the PWMB demand especially from May 2007 maybe felt only when the dates reach that point, so ~3500 lesser SOFAD maybe required for the dates to actually move forward if the inventory is the baseline.
- The total monthly is the extrapolated total for the month and cumulative sum is the cumulative figure. Now if someone is interested in finding out that what point we will reach in Sep 2011 they should put their figure of SOFAD and see the resting point.
- Some known facts are a) Total 2010 SOFAD - 26.5K (AILA Report). b) EB5 - 7.5K From reliable published reports. c) India & China Annual Cap - 6K. For this year FB spillover has been assumed to be 0. Effectively SOFAD from EB2 ROW and EB1 = 26.5 - 7.5 - 6 = 13K. For the rest of the calculations I assume that probably 10K came from EB2 ROW and 3.5K came from EB1. Adjustment for NO FB this Year = -6.5K.
Nett SOFAD from EB2 ROW and EB1 without FB would be 13K - 6.5K = 6.5K
Now lets analyze on Trackitt to see the trend for October to December
Year 2009 (Oct to Dec)
EB2 ROW - 190
EB2 NIW - 27
Total - 207

EB1A - 46
EB1B - 87
EB1C - 63
Total - 196

Year 2010 (Oct to Dec)
EB2 ROW - 122
EB2 NIW - 13
Total - 135

EB1A - 16
EB1B - 18
EB1B - 19
Total - 53
The drop in EB1 appears to be really drastic however I feel it is not being adequately represented.
However looks like the EB1 consumption could drop this year compared to last year though. If the EB1
Consumption actually drops to 50% of last year then this could provide ~ 15K SOFAD this year.
Consumption last year = 43000 - 3500 = 39500.
If we assume a drop of 25% (Extremely conservative) the consumption will be 29625
However this year we are back to the regular cap so SOFAD = 40320-26925 ~ 11K
If we assume a drop of 50% (Extremely Optimistic) the consumption will be 19750
However this year we are back to the regular cap so SOFAD = 40320-19750 ~ 20K
For the conservative calculation let’s just go ahead with 11K.
For EB2 the data appears to be good.
EB2 ROW consumption last year = 40320 - 6000 - 10000 = 24320.
Now the trend shows that the consumption is (135/207) * 24320 ~ 16K.
So potential SOFAD out of EB2 ROW will be 34K - 16K ~ 18K.
EB5 SOFAD I expect will decline from 7K to 5K.
Hence total SOFAD that we can expect in 2011 = 11 + 18 + 5 = 34K.
With ~ 24 K SOFAD we may reach Mid March 2007. Now lets look at all possible scenario’s.
Worst possible case is that we have 26.5K SOFAd just like last year, this will put us at 01-JAN02007.
Best case scenario is EB1 gives us an extra 10K and the PWMB demand will be felt only when the dates cross May 2007 so kind of add 13K on top of the 34K this can actually help to throw us over the fence finally to 01-AUG-2007, this again is extremely optimistic but not impossible. We just have to continue monitoring for more time.
However for now I would like to stick with the final range as Feb – Apr 2007 in Sep 2011 for EB2-I staying conservative.
EB3 –I is also showing good movement Apr-May 2002 seems to be in sight and EB3 ROW seems to be set to move to Mid 2006 as well.

[qesehmk]

Spec yes the logic is right. But i guess for EB2I, since EB2I is not current there are no new 485 coming into system other than conversions. (Granted PWMB is a possibility but a remote one since PWMB horizon starts sometime in 2007 as PERM approvals were coming in on time during early 2007) and right now the date is May 06. Does that make sense?

And so I would imagine any increase in inventory plus Q1 quota is a fairly accurate estimate of conversions (save any miniscule denials withdrawals etc).

p.s. Oops now i am seeing the light. u mean that some conversions may relate to a date post may-06 and so conversions may be understated by my formula? Right?


Q,

Not at all. I probably didn't explain it very well.

The 374 increase is the net effect of all the months in the Inventory between Oct and January. Some have risen and some have fallen.

Clearly if there is a rise in the number of cases in a particular month, they are new cases. I don't think we disagree on that.

In months where the figure has fallen, it could be due to one of 2 reasons - either it was a withdrawal/denial or it was due to an approval.

If it was due to an approval, then that number should not be deducted from the number of new cases, since that is expected in the 3 months that have passed.

Say we have 3 months that were Current in October-Dec 2010 and the change in those months between the Inventories was :

100 --- (200) --- 300

The number of NEW cases is NOT 100 - 200 + 300 = 200

It is 100 + 300 = 400

The (200) represents removal of EXISTING cases, not a reduction in NEW cases.

It COULD have been a withdrawal, but we can't tell. On the balance of probability, if the date was Current, it was an approval. If the date wasn't Current, it must have been a withdrawal.

I don't think I can explain it any better than that.

I didn't take offence! I am probably guilty as charged! :D

[kd2008]

Teddy, you are way overly optimistic about EB2 ROW. Please have a look at

http://www.sewashree.com/forums/showthread.php?4-EB2-Predictions-(Rather-Calculations)&p=371#post371

and the post before that.

Quoting Q's take from that post:

8K ROW PERM approvals in last 4 months translate to 24K approvals for full year. Of which 12K are EB2ROW. Which translate to 26K EB2ROW 485s for full year approvals - which means about 8K SOFAD to IC (given MP are already in the PERM approvals). Even otherwise MP have low EB2 demand and whatever demand they have would be offset by possible rejections/withdrawals within the ROW labor going to 140 and 485 stages.

Thanks!


Month-Year India China PWMB CP Total
Monthly Cumulative
Sum
Offset 7800 200 0 0 8000 8000
May-06 1110 38 100 100 1348 9348
Jun-06 1696 541 100 100 2437 11785
Jul-06 1505 620 100 100 2325 14110
Aug-06 1677 693 100 100 2570 16680
Sep-06 1745 773 100 100 2718 19398
Oct-06 1747 732 100 100 2679 22077
Nov-06 1737 667 100 100 2604 24681
Dec-06 1881 770 200 100 2951 27632
Jan-07 1540 654 200 100 2494 30126
Feb-07 1444 615 200 100 2359 32485
Mar-07 1404 682 200 100 2386 34871
Apr-07 1420 609 200 100 2329 37200
May-07 1070 519 500 100 2189 39389
Jun-07 1272 558 1000 100 2930 42319
Jul-07 1673 1788 2000 100 5561 47880

- In the table above the columns India and china represent the monthly figures from the Jan 2011 Inventory.
- I have assumed a starting offset of 2000 as there were cases which did not see approval last year even though they were current. I have assumed PD porting to be 6000 (Double of what was calculated last year for India). PD porting has now been added to the offset point itself as we will see movement only in the last quarter and I believe that the date won’t cross May 2006 before the last quarter in the absence of any kind of spillover (SOFAD).
- PWMB refers to those who could not file for their 485’s as the labor approval was missed out or they are adding dependants now. These values are by my gut feeling another point to note is that the PWMB demand especially from May 2007 maybe felt only when the dates reach that point, so ~3500 lesser SOFAD maybe required for the dates to actually move forward if the inventory is the baseline.
- The total monthly is the extrapolated total for the month and cumulative sum is the cumulative figure. Now if someone is interested in finding out that what point we will reach in Sep 2011 they should put their figure of SOFAD and see the resting point.
- Some known facts are a) Total 2010 SOFAD - 26.5K (AILA Report). b) EB5 - 7.5K From reliable published reports. c) India & China Annual Cap - 6K. For this year FB spillover has been assumed to be 0. Effectively SOFAD from EB2 ROW and EB1 = 26.5 - 7.5 - 6 = 13K. For the rest of the calculations I assume that probably 10K came from EB2 ROW and 3.5K came from EB1. Adjustment for NO FB this Year = -6.5K.
Nett SOFAD from EB2 ROW and EB1 without FB would be 13K - 6.5K = 6.5K
Now lets analyze on Trackitt to see the trend for October to December
Year 2009 (Oct to Dec)
EB2 ROW - 190
EB2 NIW - 27
Total - 207

EB1A - 46
EB1B - 87
EB1C - 63
Total - 196

Year 2010 (Oct to Dec)
EB2 ROW - 122
EB2 NIW - 13
Total - 135

EB1A - 16
EB1B - 18
EB1B - 19
Total - 53
The drop in EB1 appears to be really drastic however I feel it is not being adequately represented.
However looks like the EB1 consumption could drop this year compared to last year though. If the EB1
Consumption actually drops to 50% of last year then this could provide ~ 15K SOFAD this year.
Consumption last year = 43000 - 3500 = 39500.
If we assume a drop of 25% (Extremely conservative) the consumption will be 29625
However this year we are back to the regular cap so SOFAD = 40320-26925 ~ 11K
If we assume a drop of 50% (Extremely Optimistic) the consumption will be 19750
However this year we are back to the regular cap so SOFAD = 40320-19750 ~ 20K
For the conservative calculation let’s just go ahead with 11K.
For EB2 the data appears to be good.
EB2 ROW consumption last year = 40320 - 6000 - 10000 = 24320.
Now the trend shows that the consumption is (135/207) * 24320 ~ 16K.
So potential SOFAD out of EB2 ROW will be 34K - 16K ~ 18K.
EB5 SOFAD I expect will decline from 7K to 5K.
Hence total SOFAD that we can expect in 2011 = 11 + 18 + 5 = 34K.
With ~ 24 K SOFAD we may reach Mid March 2007. Now lets look at all possible scenario’s.
Worst possible case is that we have 26.5K SOFAd just like last year, this will put us at 01-JAN02007.
Best case scenario is EB1 gives us an extra 10K and the PWMB demand will be felt only when the dates cross May 2007 so kind of add 13K on top of the 34K this can actually help to throw us over the fence finally to 01-AUG-2007, this again is extremely optimistic but not impossible. We just have to continue monitoring for more time.
However for now I would like to stick with the final range as Feb – Apr 2007 in Sep 2011 for EB2-I staying conservative.
EB3 –I is also showing good movement Apr-May 2002 seems to be in sight and EB3 ROW seems to be set to move to Mid 2006 as well.

[Spectator]

Spec yes the logic is right. But i guess for EB2I, since EB2I is not current there are no new 485 coming into system other than conversions. (Granted PWMB is a possibility but a remote one since PWMB horizon starts sometime in 2007 as PERM approvals were coming in on time during early 2007) and right now the date is May 06. Does that make sense?

And so I would imagine any increase in inventory plus Q1 quota is a fairly accurate estimate of conversions (save any miniscule denials withdrawals etc).

p.s. Oops now i am seeing the light. u mean that some conversions may relate to a date post may-06 and so conversions may be understated by my formula? Right?Q,

Certainly, one of the things I am saying is that the data needs to be treated differently, depending whether it is pre May 2006 or not.

I am not arguing that additions are anything other than Porting (the majority) or PWMB (less at the moment).

Maybe if I try to illustrate my point with real figures from the Inventory it would be clearer.

Let's start with months that were not Current during Oct-Dec 2010 (May 2006 (except for 7 days) to August 2007, since I don't think we disagree on those. I'll choose a range that has positive and negative differences.

Month/Year --- Oct 2010 --- Jan 2011 --- Diff
Apr 2007 ------ 1,370 ------ 1,420 ------ 50
May 2007 ------ 1,123 ------ 1,070 ----- (53)
Jun 2007 ------ 1,307 ------ 1,272 ----- (35)
Jul 2007 ------ 1,518 ------ 1,673 ----- 155
Aug 2007 -------- 202 --------- 95 ---- (107)

Since there has been an increase in April and July, these must represent new cases that weren't present in the October Inventory.

In May, June and August, since the dates aren't Current, the reductions must be due to Withdrawals/Denials.

So the real change to the Inventory is the sum of the values +10.

Even in this case, for the purpose of counting NEW applications for Porting purposes, reductions should be ignored - there are 205 new applications - the reductions only help how far the PD might advance.

Now let's look at some months that were Current in the period Oct-Dec 2010. Those are months before May 2006.

Month/Year --- Oct 2010 --- Jan 2011 --- Diff
Jan 2004 --------- 21 --------- 15 ------ (6)
Feb 2004 ---------- 7 --------- 13 ------- 6
Mar 2004 --------- 33 --------- 20 ----- (13)
Apr 2004 --------- 13 --------- 20 ------- 7
May 2004 --------- 22 --------- 19 ------ (3)


Again, since there has been an increase in February and April, these must represent new cases, which weren't present in the October Inventory.

For reductions in January, March and May, these are most probably due to approvals in October to December 2010, since those PDs were Current. They would therefore have been present in the October Inventory and don't represent a change involving new applications. They will be counted when we add on the approvals during Oct-Dec (757) later. If we include the reduction now, it will net off from within the 757 figure to zero and effectively reduce 757 to 735.

Thus, the real difference becomes:

Jan 2004 --------- 0
Feb 2004 --------- 6
Mar 2004 --------- 0
Apr 2004 --------- 7
May 2004 --------- 0

and the real difference between the Inventories is +13 rather than the -9 that would be calculated using all the figures.

Thus (and I know these aren't the correct figures), if approvals were 100 in Dec-Oct, then with the net addition of 13, Porting would be 113, rather than 91 if the reduction due to approvals is accounted for.

The difference in how different date ranges are treated might only be important to me, since I use the results to derive a new October 2010 Inventory figure starting point for my calculations. Conceivably and probably, it doesn't affect how you derive your figures for overall movement throughout the year.

But the point about only counting additions stands for calculation of Porting.

To use an analogy:

If there are 5 women in a room at the beginning (the October Inventory) and then over a period of time (Oct-Dec) 12 men enter the room (new applications), but the 5 women leave (are approved) it doesn't alter the fact that 12 men are in the room. You can't say that there are only 7 men because 5 women left.

I'll probably get into trouble for using men and women in the analogy, but there is no intent to offend.

That's the best I can do. If that's not good enough, let's just leave it be.

[qesehmk]

Spec

I think you and I are saying similar things except following points:

1) I am not including denials withdrawals to be conservative.
2) I am not including PWMB as I am thinking they will kick in after Jan 07 or even mar 07.
3) I am assuming all portings to be prior to Jul 07 (or in fact may 06). (to be conservative)

If you look at your method and use same assumptions I think you will arrive at the same macro formula I am using.

One of the reasons I usually am reluctant to look at monthly numbers and changes to those numbers is because sometimes numbers change for nothing indicating USCIS is correcting its records. But anyway .. thanks for the discussion. I think you are very very thorought Spec. And BTW Your illustration is good with me ! Keep it up :-)



Q,

Certainly, one of the things I am saying is that the data needs to be treated differently, depending whether it is pre May 2006 or not.

I am not arguing that additions are anything other than Porting (the majority) or PWMB (less at the moment).

Maybe if I try to illustrate my point with real figures from the Inventory it would be clearer.

Let's start with months that were not Current during Oct-Dec 2010 (May 2006 (except for 7 days) to August 2007, since I don't think we disagree on those. I'll choose a range that has positive and negative differences.

Month/Year --- Oct 2010 --- Jan 2011 --- Diff
Apr 2007 ------ 1,370 ------ 1,420 ------ 50
May 2007 ------ 1,123 ------ 1,070 ----- (53)
Jun 2007 ------ 1,307 ------ 1,272 ----- (35)
Jul 2007 ------ 1,518 ------ 1,673 ----- 155
Aug 2007 -------- 202 --------- 95 ---- (107)

Since there has been an increase in April and July, these must represent new cases that weren't present in the October Inventory.

In May, June and August, since the dates aren't Current, the reductions must be due to Withdrawals/Denials.

So the real change to the Inventory is the sum of the values +10.

Even in this case, for the purpose of counting NEW applications for Porting purposes, reductions should be ignored - there are 205 new applications - the reductions only help how far the PD might advance.

Now let's look at some months that were Current in the period Oct-Dec 2010. Those are months before May 2006.

Month/Year --- Oct 2010 --- Jan 2011 --- Diff
Jan 2004 --------- 21 --------- 15 ------ (6)
Feb 2004 ---------- 7 --------- 13 ------- 6
Mar 2004 --------- 33 --------- 20 ----- (13)
Apr 2004 --------- 13 --------- 20 ------- 7
May 2004 --------- 22 --------- 19 ------ (3)


Again, since there has been an increase in February and April, these must represent new cases, which weren't present in the October Inventory.

For reductions in January, March and May, these are most probably due to approvals in October to December 2010, since those PDs were Current. They would therefore have been present in the October Inventory and don't represent a change involving new applications. They will be counted when we add on the approvals during Oct-Dec (757) later. If we include the reduction now, it will net off from within the 757 figure to zero and effectively reduce 757 to 735.

Thus, the real difference becomes:

Jan 2004 --------- 0
Feb 2004 ---------- 6
Mar 2004 --------- 0
Apr 2004 --------- 7
May 2004 --------- 0
[/FONT]
and the real difference between the Inventories is +13 rather than the -9 that would be calculated using all the figures.

Thus (and I know these aren't the correct figures), if approvals were 100 in Dec-Oct, then with the net addition of 13, Porting would be 113, rather than 91 if the reduction due to approvals is accounted for.

The difference in how different date ranges are treated might only be important to me, since I use the results to derive a new October 2010 Inventory figure starting point for my calculations. Conceivably and probably, it doesn't affect how you derive your figures for overall movement throughout the year.

But the point about only counting additions stands for calculation of Porting.

To use an analogy:

If there are 5 women in a room at the beginning (the October Inventory) and then over a period of time (Oct-Dec) 12 men enter the room (new applications), but the 5 women leave (are approved) it doesn't alter the fact that 12 men are in the room. You can't say that there are only 7 men because 5 women left.

I'll probably get into trouble for using men and women in the analogy, but there is no intent to offend.

That's the best I can do. If that's not good enough, let's just leave it be.

[Spectator]

Spec

I think you and I are saying similar things except following points:

1) I am not including denials withdrawals to be conservative.
2) I am not including PWMB as I am thinking they will kick in after Jan 07 or even mar 07.
3) I am assuming all portings to be prior to Jul 07 (or in fact may 06). (to be conservative)

If you look at your method and use same assumptions I think you will arrive at the same macro formula I am using.

One of the reasons I usually am reluctant to look at monthly numbers and changes to those numbers is because sometimes numbers change for nothing indicating USCIS is correcting its records. But anyway .. thanks for the discussion. I think you are very very thorought Spec. And BTW Your illustration is good with me ! Keep it up :-)No problem.

To be clear, I am not implicitly including PWMB either. I am just saying they are indistinguishable from Porting or a transfer from a Field Office. They all add one new case to the numbers.

The only Porting numbers that are important at the moment are those that are in dates that we think might be Current this FY. Outside that range, they will affect future years.

I guess if I were to boil down to the simplest level what I was trying to say, it would be that:

To be a Porting case, it must be a new application. A new application will cause the Inventory to rise. Therefore, the only apparent Porting cases will appear in months that have a rise in numbers. By definition, if the numbers reduced, we can't see any new cases so it is effectively zero for calculating new cases.

I too am wary at looking at individual months - and I don't. For my purposes, I have grossed up the individual changes into a single figure.

I think above all, it shows how difficult (impossible actually) it is to infer the Porting rate from the numbers. For instance, if a month had reduced by 100 we have no idea if that is 300 - 400 or 0 -100. Similarly, if the figure increased 100, we have no idea if that is 300 - 200 or 100 - 0.

The best we can do is a rough approximation. I think we have probably exhausted this topic.

[qesehmk]

I think above all, it shows how difficult (impossible actually) it is to infer the Porting rate from the numbers. For instance, if a month had reduced by 100 we have no idea if that is 300 - 400 or 0 -100. Similarly, if the figure increased 100, we have no idea if that is 300 - 200 or 100 - 0.

Exactly. And that's why we bring in another check which is the Q1 quota of 750 that we assume is entirely applied. But who knows what the actual consumption is? Again ... its all educated guesswork at best.

[viypr07]

All,
Just joined. Been following this for past week. Appreciate the discussion and insight provided by all here.

[TeddyKoochu]

Teddy, you are way overly optimistic about EB2 ROW. Please have a look at

http://www.sewashree.com/forums/showthread.php?4-EB2-Predictions-(Rather-Calculations)&p=371#post371

and the post before that.

Quoting Q's take from that post:

8K ROW PERM approvals in last 4 months translate to 24K approvals for full year. Of which 12K are EB2ROW. Which translate to 26K EB2ROW 485s for full year approvals - which means about 8K SOFAD to IC (given MP are already in the PERM approvals). Even otherwise MP have low EB2 demand and whatever demand they have would be offset by possible rejections/withdrawals within the ROW labor going to 140 and 485 stages.

Thanks!
kd2008
I believe you are referring to Sangiano's analysis wherein he arrived at the figure of 32K for the fill year, Q has provide an interpretation of his analysis. Following are some of the assumptions that I would disagree with.

- For ROW he has made the assumption that EB2-EB3 is 50-50 this appears to be highly flawed. Its probably 1:2 at best.
- There is an assumption that every approved perm will lead to an approved 485 this also appears to be incorrect, IMHO atleast 20% cases would not make it.
- Perm became faster in 2010 and we all know that most of the people got approved last year itself. Now Sangiano's calculation for this year is ~32K so last year should have been 65K if that was the case then we would not have seen any SOFAD last year.
- My preference for EB2 ROW would be to check Trackitt to see the actual approval trend, I agree that this is not official published data in anyway but Trackitt is fairly popular with ROW folks the ration of Oct - Dec 2010 to 2011 is 135 to 207. Assuming EB2 ROW cases have no resistance for approvals the only factor preventing approvals would be lower demand. I would tend to agree more with dg0320.

Spectator- Many thanks for your feebback, I missed adding the EB2-I / C approvals to the offset as you have identified. Friends I have updated the post based on Spec's feedback.

[qesehmk]

Teddy

You are right in terms of trackitt approval. I have always advocated using trackitt. However what we have learnt last year is that we can't only look at 485 pipeline. You also need to look at 140 and PERM pipeline. The rate of approval may be low so far. The question is - will USCIS flush 140 and PERM pipeline to boost ROW demand and utilize the quota? In all probabibility yes.

Regarding denial and withdrawal I agree w you that yes its legitimate to factor them in to boost prediction. However, its better to be conservative and not count on denial and withdrawals.

Going back to first point the question is how are 140 and PERM pipelines for ROW behaving compared to last year?

p.s. - I just checked ... 140 is behaving similar to last year. But Atlanta perm is in sync with 485 for ROW (i.e. 2/3 demand compared to last year). So Teddy, the question is how much did ROW consume last year?



kd2008
I believe you are referring to Sangiano's analysis wherein he arrived at the figure of 32K for the fill year, Q has provide an interpretation of his analysis. Following are some of the assumptions that I would disagree with.

- For ROW he has made the assumption that EB2-EB3 is 50-50 this appears to be highly flawed. Its probably 1:2 at best.
- There is an assumption that every approved perm will lead to an approved 485 this also appears to be incorrect, IMHO atleast 20% cases would not make it.
- Perm became faster in 2010 and we all know that most of the people got approved last year itself. Now Sangiano's calculation for this year is ~32K so last year should have been 65K if that was the case then we would not have seen any SOFAD last year.
- My preference for EB2 ROW would be to check Trackitt to see the actual approval trend, I agree that this is not official published data in anyway but Trackitt is fairly popular with ROW folks the ration of Oct - Dec 2010 to 2011 is 135 to 207. Assuming EB2 ROW cases have no resistance for approvals the only factor preventing approvals would be lower demand. I would tend to agree more with dg0320.

Spectator- Many thanks for your feebback, I missed adding the EB2-I / C approvals to the offset as you have identified. Friends I have updated the post based on Spec's feedback.

[Spectator]

Spectator- Many thanks for your feebback, I missed adding the EB2-I / C approvals to the offset as you have identified. Friends I have updated the post based on Spec's feedback.Teddy,

Glad the feedback helped.

Regarding your comments. I would have the following observations based on my reading of kd2008 post.


- For ROW he has made the assumption that EB2-EB3 is 50-50 this appears to be highly flawed. Its probably 1:2 at best.
That seems to be at completely the other end of the spectrum. 33% EB2 to 67% EB3 is unrealistic IMO.

The generally accepted ratio used to be 40:60. With retrogression in EB3-ROW as well, much like India, no one is going to file an EB3 unless they have to. Similarly to India, I actually think this fact probably has shifted it nearer to 50:50.


- There is an assumption that every approved perm will lead to an approved 485 this also appears to be incorrect, IMHO atleast 20% cases would not make it.
I think there was a discussion about this previously. 20% seems high and I think it was felt 5% was a more realistic figure. I don't know if the calculation factored in any rejection rate.


- Perm became faster in 2010 and we all know that most of the people got approved last year itself. Now Sangiano's calculation for this year is ~32K so last year should have been 65K if that was the case then we would not have seen any SOFAD last year.
Your statement doesn't seem correct. In the post, the figure quoted was around 24.5k for ROW or 27.5k including Mexico and Philippines.

The 65k figure isn't a valid extrapolation, since the post says that the figures were based on what ROW was doing in the last 4 months of the year, as an attempt to see what was happening going into FY2011. At that point, nearly 80% of the approvals were as a result of PERM applications that had only been submitted in FY2010. I imagine that the reasonably high level from FY2008 would be audit cases, since they have a processing time of 2 years. Together they seem to account for 94% of cases being approved at the end of the year.

The table showing the full year gives an entirely different picture, although that appears to be for all Countries and not just ROW.

Given that the time from PERM approval to I-485 approval is not instantaneous, the majority of those PERM approvals in the last 4 months would not have been approved in FY2010, even with Premium Processing of the I-140.


- My preference for EB2 ROW would be to check Trackitt to see the actual approval trend, I agree that this is not official published data in anyway but Trackitt is fairly popular with ROW folks the ration of Oct - Dec 2010 to 2011 is 135 to 207. Assuming EB2 ROW cases have no resistance for approvals the only factor preventing approvals would be lower demand. I would tend to agree more with dg0320.
I agree that Trackitt has always tended to give pretty good figures for EB2-ROW. Since backlog reduction appears to be complete, perhaps we should expect a more linear approval trend now.

EB2-ROW has been remaining steadily on course for around 24k approvals (that's the daily average from December onwards). It is a bit lower at the moment (23k) because there does seem to have been a lull in approvals recently.

Trackitt has never been very good for Mexico or Philippines in any Category, so if the 3k prediction was correct, then that would be 27k.

[TeddyKoochu]

Teddy

You are right in terms of trackitt approval. I have always advocated using trackitt. However what we have learnt last year is that we can't only look at 485 pipeline. You also need to look at 140 and PERM pipeline. The rate of approval may be low so far. The question is - will USCIS flush 140 and PERM pipeline to boost ROW demand and utilize the quota? In all probabibility yes.

Regarding denial and withdrawal I agree w you that yes its legitimate to factor them in to boost prediction. However, its better to be conservative and not count on denial and withdrawals.

Going back to first point the question is how are 140 and PERM pipelines for ROW behaving compared to last year?

p.s. - I just checked ... 140 is behaving similar to last year. But Atlanta perm is in sync with 485 for ROW (i.e. 2/3 demand compared to last year). So Teddy, the question is how much did ROW consume last year?

How much EB2-ROW got last year can only be answered by the DOS annual report itself, however what we were able to deduce is that EB1 + EB2 ROW Sofad = 13.5K. In my calculations I have assumed EB2 ROW as 10K and EB1 as 3.5K.

[TeddyKoochu]

Spec responses inline

Teddy,

Glad the feedback helped.
Thanks
Regarding your comments. I would have the following observations based on my reading of kd2008 post.


That seems to be at completely the other end of the spectrum. 33% EB2 to 67% EB3 is unrealistic IMO.

The generally accepted ratio used to be 40:60. With retrogression in EB3-ROW as well, much like India, no one is going to file an EB3 unless they have to. Similarly to India, I actually think this fact probably has shifted it nearer to 50:50.
Ok lets start with the ratio as 40-60, these days despite PD porting happening comapnies are scared of filing in EB2 for fear of audit. I have a colleague whose consulting company refused to file in EB2 despite having 10 + years of experience. The EB2-EB3 is actually better for India in fact its upside down, I believe that 50-50 is way too high maybe 40-60 is still more realistic.
I think there was a discussion about this previously. 20% seems high and I think it was felt 5% was a more realistic figure. I don't know if the calculation factored in any rejection rate.
This calculation does not use any rejection rate it takes 100% as the rate forward.

Your statement doesn't seem correct. In the post, the figure quoted was around 24.5k for ROW or 27.5k including Mexico and Philippines.

The 65k figure isn't a valid extrapolation, since the post says that the figures were based on what ROW was doing in the last 4 months of the year, as an attempt to see what was happening going into FY2011. At that point, nearly 80% of the approvals were as a result of PERM applications that had only been submitted in FY2010. I imagine that the reasonably high level from FY2008 would be audit cases, since they have a processing time of 2 years. Together they seem to account for 94% of cases being approved at the end of the year.

The table showing the full year gives an entirely different picture, although that appears to be for all Countries and not just ROW.

Given that the time from PERM approval to I-485 approval is not instantaneous, the majority of those PERM approvals in the last 4 months would not have been approved in FY2010, even with Premium Processing of the I-140.


I agree that Trackitt has always tended to give pretty good figures for EB2-ROW. Since backlog reduction appears to be complete, perhaps we should expect a more linear approval trend now.

EB2-ROW has been remaining steadily on course for around 24k approvals (that's the daily average from December onwards). It is a bit lower at the moment (23k) because there does seem to have been a lull in approvals recently.

What Iam saying is slightly different, in 2010 the perm process encomapssed 2007, 2008 and 2009 cases and part of 2010, so if say the calculated extrapolated figure based on this calculation is say 28K then what should have seen approval in FY2010 itself the previous 8 months would be say double lets say ~ 50K by this logic. So if this were to hold true then there woud have been absolutely no SOFAD last year, thats why Iam doutful about this calculation.

Trackitt has never been very good for Mexico or Philippines in any Category, so if the 3k prediction was correct, then that would be 27k.

[Spectator]

I've just been to the DOL website http://icert.doleta.gov/ to check that my 2 year timeframe for PERM audits was correct. It was. Currently they are processing cases from December 2008.

What did catch my eye was this:


OFLC has initiated an intensive effort to reduce the Permanent Labor Certification Program's pending caseload. Our goal for FY 2010 is to reduce the backlog by 50%. We are on schedule, and we will continue this effort as part of our larger Departmental commitment to customer service.

We have assumed that the backlog reduction effort was largely completed and that PERM approvals would solely reflect current demand, even if we can't agree what that demand is. That would potentially put a brake on the number of PERM approvals to those that were "Current".

This seems to be true for normal cases, as the processing date for these is December 2010.

The backlog has only been reduced by 50% according to the statement above. I think it would be fair to believe that the remaining 50% probably includes the Audit and Appeal cases (or would it?).

If DOL now turn their resources to reducing the remaining 50% backlog as they have said, then PERM approvals in FY2011 are going to remain at a high rate and consist of Current applications plus more backlog applications.

I've always understood that EB2 cases have been more likely to attract an audit, although I don't know the truth of this statement. It does make sense.

If indeed we start to see a reduction in pending audit cases (perhaps this would be evidenced by a reduction in audit processing times?), then this could lead to a higher proportion of EB2 approvals compared to a normal distribution.

It is something to consider anyway.

[Spectator]

What Iam saying is slightly different, in 2010 the perm process encomapssed 2007, 2008 and 2009 cases and part of 2010, so if say the calculated extrapolated figure based on this calculation is say 28K then what should hav seen approval in FY2010 itself the previous 8 months would be say double lets say ~ 50K by this logic. So if this were to hold true then there woud have been absolutely no SOFAD last year.

That's not correct. It would be if the split for the full year was the same as the final 4 months - but it is not.

The only comparable figures in the post relate to all Countries and the Calendar Year, but they illustrate the same point.

Full Year
2010 -- 18,050 -- 25.70%
2009 -- 38,422 -- 54.70%
2008 -- 10,942 -- 15.58%
2007 --- 2,726 --- 3.88%
2006 ------ 84 --- 0.12%
2005 ------ 13 --- 0.02%

Total - 70,237 - 100.00%

Last 4 Months
2010 -- 16,064 -- 74.602%
2009 --- 2,659 -- 12.348%
2008 --- 2,622 -- 12.177%
2007 ----- 176 --- 0.817%
2006 ------ 10 --- 0.046%
2005 ------- 2 --- 0.009%

Total - 21,533 -- 100.00%

For the whole Year, only 26% of the approvals were from applications submitted in 2010.

However, for the final 4 months, 2010 applications represented 75% of approvals.

It is a similar story for other years. The % is very different.

What is happening at the end of FY2010 is a much better indicator of what will happen in FY2011, even more so when the full FY2010 contained so many backlog cases.

[TeddyKoochu]

Teddy,

Glad the feedback helped.

Regarding your comments. I would have the following observations based on my reading of kd2008 post.


That seems to be at completely the other end of the spectrum. 33% EB2 to 67% EB3 is unrealistic IMO.

The generally accepted ratio used to be 40:60. With retrogression in EB3-ROW as well, much like India, no one is going to file an EB3 unless they have to. Similarly to India, I actually think this fact probably has shifted it nearer to 50:50.


I think there was a discussion about this previously. 20% seems high and I think it was felt 5% was a more realistic figure. I don't know if the calculation factored in any rejection rate.


Your statement doesn't seem correct. In the post, the figure quoted was around 24.5k for ROW or 27.5k including Mexico and Philippines.

The 65k figure isn't a valid extrapolation, since the post says that the figures were based on what ROW was doing in the last 4 months of the year, as an attempt to see what was happening going into FY2011. At that point, nearly 80% of the approvals were as a result of PERM applications that had only been submitted in FY2010. I imagine that the reasonably high level from FY2008 would be audit cases, since they have a processing time of 2 years. Together they seem to account for 94% of cases being approved at the end of the year.

The table showing the full year gives an entirely different picture, although that appears to be for all Countries and not just ROW.

Given that the time from PERM approval to I-485 approval is not instantaneous, the majority of those PERM approvals in the last 4 months would not have been approved in FY2010, even with Premium Processing of the I-140.


I agree that Trackitt has always tended to give pretty good figures for EB2-ROW. Since backlog reduction appears to be complete, perhaps we should expect a more linear approval trend now.

EB2-ROW has been remaining steadily on course for around 24k approvals (that's the daily average from December onwards). It is a bit lower at the moment (23k) because there does seem to have been a lull in approvals recently.

Trackitt has never been very good for Mexico or Philippines in any Category, so if the 3k prediction was correct, then that would be 27k.


That's not correct. It would be if the split for the full year was the same as the final 4 months - but it is not.

The only comparable figures in the post relate to all Countries and the Calendar Year, but they illustrate the same point.

Full Year
2010 -- 18,050 -- 25.70%
2009 -- 38,422 -- 54.70%
2008 -- 10,942 -- 15.58%
2007 --- 2,726 --- 3.88%
2006 ------ 84 --- 0.12%
2005 ------ 13 --- 0.02%

Total - 70,237 - 100.00%

Last 4 Months
2010 -- 16,064 -- 74.602%
2009 --- 2,659 -- 12.348%
2008 --- 2,622 -- 12.177%
2007 ----- 176 --- 0.817%
2006 ------ 10 --- 0.046%
2005 ------- 2 --- 0.009%

Total - 21,533 -- 100.00%

For the whole Year, only 26% of the approvals were from applications submitted in 2010.

However, for the final 4 months, 2010 applications represented 75% of approvals.

It is a similar story for other years. The % is very different.

What is happening at the end of FY2010 is a much better indicator of what will happen in FY2011, even more so when the full FY2010 contained so many backlog cases.

Spec help me understand the following. The full year was 70237 while the last 4 months was 21533, so effectively 2/3rds of the cases saw 485 approvals in FY 2010. If that was the case then we would have hardly seen any SOFAD in 2010 as th EB2 ROW demand would have consumed everything. Iam ok with the extrapolation but the figures don't seem to add up.

[qesehmk]

How much EB2-ROW got last year can only be answered by the DOS annual report itself, however what we were able to deduce is that EB1 + EB2 ROW Sofad = 13.5K. In my calculations I have assumed EB2 ROW as 10K and EB1 as 3.5K.

I think the SOFAD was more than that. Just look at EB2 IC reduction which was almost 57.5 - 35.5 = 22K. (Where 57.5 is from Dec 09 and 35.5 is OCt 10).

I would like to think that most of it came from EB1 rather than EB2ROW because of accelerated PERM approvals. So that puts EB2ROW almost at full utilization for 2010. i.e. approx 32K. For 2011 if the rate is 2/3rd i.e. approx 22K then EB2ROW can only give as much as last year since the 10K reduction here is offset by FB spillover being gone this year. So whatever ROW gave last year + whatever EB1 gave last year was approx 22K. Right?

That's counting the optimistic projection that ROW in 2011 is running at 2/3rd of 2010 demand.

So I believe 35K is a very wild projection for 2011 especially given that 10K FB spillover is absent this year.

p.s. - The DHS report will be tremendously helpful. Lets keep our fingers crossed!

[TeddyKoochu]

I think the SOFAD was more than that. Just look at EB2 IC reduction which was almost 57.5 - 35.5 = 22K. (Where 57.5 is from Dec 09 and 35.5 is OCt 10).

I would like to think that most of it came from EB1 rather than EB2ROW because of accelerated PERM approvals. So that puts EB2ROW almost at full utilization for 2010. i.e. approx 32K. For 2011 if the rate is 2/3rd i.e. approx 22K then EB2ROW can only give as much as last year since the 10K reduction here is offset by FB spillover being gone this year. So whatever ROW gave last year + whatever EB1 gave last year was approx 22K. Right?

That's counting the optimistic projection that ROW in 2011 is running at 2/3rd of 2010 demand.

So I believe 35K is a very wild projection for 2011 especially given that 10K FB spillover is absent this year.

p.s. - The DHS report will be tremendously helpful. Lets keep our fingers crossed!

Q as per the AILA report the total SOFAD was 26.5K. Another report suggested that EB5 was 7K and knowing that Eb2 I+C = 6K what we got from EB2 ROW was 13.5K. My belief has always been despite everything that majority of the SOFAD ~ 10K came from EB2 ROW while ~ 3.5K came from EB1 this is based on the 2009 trend that EB1 use even more than its allocation. However if most of the SOFAD came from EB1 and not EB2 ROW the whole equation changes. The available data for EB2 ROW is good however for EB1 it cannot be relied upon. If we were to have the same SOFAD as last year after including for the loss of FB then the PD in Sep 2011 may just be 01-JAN-2007 it would be a 10K reduction from the 35K. I believe expecting more than 25% reduction in EB1 maybe unrealistic.

[qesehmk]

If we were to have the same SOFAD as last year after including for the loss of FB then the PD in Sep 2011 may just be 01-JAN-2007 it would be a 10K reduction from the 35K.
I would put this a little differently. If we were to have teh same demand as last year then in 2011 we will see 10K less SOFAD (because FB spillover is gone).

Right?

So the question is where do we think demand may actually go down? EB5/4/2ROW/1 ? As you noted EB2 may have 1/3 less demand compared to 2010. Now that's a big one. If true and if in 2010 ROW utilized all its quota then in 2011 EB2ROW reduction is roughly equivalent to 10K and compensates the FB spillover reduction.

So if everything else stays same then in 2011 we will expect same SOFAD as last year i.e. 26.5K. Right.

That looks like an optimistic scenario (if all our base assumptions are right.). So I think what sangiano said and I am saying and I think spec you think similar - is that the likely SOFAD would be in the range 22-28K. My own range is bigger than that given the uncertainty in many assumptions. But the mean revolves around 24-26K range which is hardly going to cross Dec 06.

That's why still struggling with your 35K claim.

[Spectator]

Spec help me understand the following. The full year was 70237 while the last 4 months was 21533, so effectively 2/3rds of the cases saw 485 approvals in FY 2010. If that was the case then we would have hardly seen any SOFAD in 2010 as th EB2 ROW demand would have consumed everything. Iam ok with the extrapolation but the figures don't seem to add up.

Teddy,

Let me start by saying that I enjoy our conversations immensely. I find them very stimulating and they make me think about the issues and assumptions even more. We appear to be polar opposites in that you are the ultra optimist and I am the ultra conservative. I think that is a good thing for the forum.

To answer your question:

The 70,237 and 21,533 represent all Countries and all Categories, not just EB2-ROW, Mexico & Philippines.

Lets just look at the CY2010 cases. I say this because many or most of the other years will be due to backlog, which wouldn't be a factor for FY2011 and it is these (actually FY2010) figures that the calculation in kd2008 post is based on.

The last 4 months of FY2010 had 16,064 cases approved that were submitted in CY2010 by all Countries.

We also know that there were a total of 18,050 cases submitted in CY2010 by all Countries approved in the whole of FY2010, so only 1,986 can have been approved in the first 8 months of FY2010.

That implies that 4,016 per month current (in fact not all current since the FY began in October) cases were being approved at the end of the year, compared to 248 per month over the first 8 months. That is for all Countries, not just EB2-ROW.

For EB2-ROW all we can say is that of the 16,064 cases submitted in CY2010 and approved in the last 4 months, EB2-ROW accounted for 5,799 of them.

What is missing is the corresponding breakdown by FY submission for all Countries over the last 4 months and the FY submission breakdown for ROW for the whole of FY2010. I might see if I can compile the figures from the data I have.

In fact, I have studied kd2008 post in more detail and found that the calculation was actually very conservative.

It was based only on applications submitted in the current FY. Judging by the evidence, it excluded any contribution from cases coming out of audit and largely ignores any normal cases that take longer than average to approve. We could take the % for these to be 16.26% and 5.61% respectively, although I have heard the audit % is rather higher.

If we take into account that you believe the denial rate at I-140/I-485 stage is 20%, then these would pretty much cancel each other out and the figures would remain as they are.

[veni001]

The DHS report will be tremendously helpful. Lets keep our fingers crossed!

We may have to wait until July/August to get this report!:(

[Spectator]

I think the SOFAD was more than that. Just look at EB2 IC reduction which was almost 57.5 - 35.5 = 22K. (Where 57.5 is from Dec 09 and 35.5 is OCt 10).

I would like to think that most of it came from EB1 rather than EB2ROW because of accelerated PERM approvals. So that puts EB2ROW almost at full utilization for 2010. i.e. approx 32K.
I actually pretty much agree with Teddy on this one.

Our figures differ slightly, mainly because of a different amount for EB5 (must check that).

I believe the 20.5k spillover for FY2010 was comprised of EB1 - 2.3k, EB2 - 9.4k, EB5 - 8.8k. If Teddy's lower figure for EB5 is correct, the difference would come from EB1, since most of the EB2 figure is derived from Trackitt data. The part I am unsure of is the contribution from Mexico and Philippines.

[qesehmk]

Spec

I am ok with EB5. As per EB1 or EB2 ROW ... since all we can do is guess .. lets hope DHS report comes out soon and ends our guesswork as well as provide some basis for 2011 prediction!



I actually pretty much agree with Teddy on this one.

Our figures differ slightly, mainly because of a different amount for EB5 (must check that).

I believe the 20.5k spillover for FY2010 was comprised of EB1 - 2.3k, EB2 - 9.4k, EB5 - 8.8k. If Teddy's lower figure for EB5 is correct, the difference would come from EB1, since most of the EB2 figure is derived from Trackitt data. The part I am unsure of is the contribution from Mexico and Philippines.

[Spectator]

Spec

I am ok with EB5. As per EB1 or EB2 ROW ... since all we can do is guess .. lets hope DHS report comes out soon and ends our guesswork as well as provide some basis for 2011 prediction!I am also really looking forward to the report as well.

To be pedantic, it is the Visa Statistics from DOS that we will see first and that should be out within the next month. The DHS Yearbook is also very useful since it gives such information as the breakdown of EB1 into A, B & C. I think that is usually published in August, which is too late for our purposes this year.

As you said, I can be rather anal at times! :D

[qesehmk]

LoL !!

I am sorry I meant DoS report at this link (http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/statistics/statistics_1476.html)

I think that report should've been in by Dec 10. DHS report to congress is another thing. And DHS year book of immigration statistics is yet another one.


I am also really looking forward to the report as well.

To be pedantic, it is the Visa Statistics from DOS that we will see first and that should be out within the next month. The DHS Yearbook is also very useful since it gives such information as the breakdown of EB1 into A, B & C. I think that is usually published in August, which is too late for our purposes this year.

As you said, I can be rather anal at times! :D

[Spectator]

I actually pretty much agree with Teddy on this one.

Our figures differ slightly, mainly because of a different amount for EB5 (must check that).

I believe the 20.5k spillover for FY2010 was comprised of EB1 - 2.3k, EB2 - 9.4k, EB5 - 8.8k. If Teddy's lower figure for EB5 is correct, the difference would come from EB1, since most of the EB2 figure is derived from Trackitt data. The part I am unsure of is the contribution from Mexico and Philippines.
I found the source of my EB5 prediction from earlier in the thread.

This document http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Outreach/Public%20Engagement/National%20Engagement%20Pages/2010%20Events/October%202010/EB-5%20Presentation_Quarterly%20Engagement%20Oct%2014 %202010.pdf discusses the EB5 program.

On page 9 it gives preliminary figures for FY2010 Visa Usage of 1,886. The figures quoted for previous FY match to the Visa Reports.

In FY2010 EB5 had a quota of 7.1% of 150,657 visas, which is 10,697.

If only 1,886 were actually used, then EB5 contributed 8,811 to SOFAD.

[bieber]

can someone help me understand,

if SOFAD for last year was 26500, why there is only 22000 inventory went down for EB2(I+C)?

[Spectator]

can someone help me understand,

if SOFAD for last year was 26500, why there is only 22000 inventory went down for EB2(I+C)?

Hi bieber,

The USCIS Inventory does not contain all cases that are available for approval.

In addition there are Consular Processed cases, cases approved directly from Field Offices, new applications received and approved between Inventories and Porting cases.

A combination of these would account for the missing numbers.

The FAQ section contains an explanation of this topic.

[qesehmk]

Great question and observation.

I think the shortfall indicates EB3I->EB2I conversions AND/OR wastage by USCIS. I am inclined more towards the first than second.


can someone help me understand,

if SOFAD for last year was 26500, why there is only 22000 inventory went down for EB2(I+C)?

[bieber]

thanx spec and Q,

one last question Q, how did u derive Eb1 and Eb2ROW consumption as 1000/month and 7000/qtr based on inventory reports?

[qesehmk]

Sorry .... didn't understand teh question. Where did I say that?


thanx spec and Q,

one last question Q, how did u derive Eb1 and Eb2ROW consumption as 1000/month and 7000/qtr based on inventory reports?

[TeddyKoochu]

I think the SOFAD was more than that. Just look at EB2 IC reduction which was almost 57.5 - 35.5 = 22K. (Where 57.5 is from Dec 09 and 35.5 is OCt 10).

I would like to think that most of it came from EB1 rather than EB2ROW because of accelerated PERM approvals. So that puts EB2ROW almost at full utilization for 2010. i.e. approx 32K. For 2011 if the rate is 2/3rd i.e. approx 22K then EB2ROW can only give as much as last year since the 10K reduction here is offset by FB spillover being gone this year. So whatever ROW gave last year + whatever EB1 gave last year was approx 22K. Right?

That's counting the optimistic projection that ROW in 2011 is running at 2/3rd of 2010 demand.

So I believe 35K is a very wild projection for 2011 especially given that 10K FB spillover is absent this year.

p.s. - The DHS report will be tremendously helpful. Lets keep our fingers crossed!


I would put this a little differently. If we were to have teh same demand as last year then in 2011 we will see 10K less SOFAD (because FB spillover is gone).

Right?

So the question is where do we think demand may actually go down? EB5/4/2ROW/1 ? As you noted EB2 may have 1/3 less demand compared to 2010. Now that's a big one. If true and if in 2010 ROW utilized all its quota then in 2011 EB2ROW reduction is roughly equivalent to 10K and compensates the FB spillover reduction.

So if everything else stays same then in 2011 we will expect same SOFAD as last year i.e. 26.5K. Right.

That looks like an optimistic scenario (if all our base assumptions are right.). So I think what sangiano said and I am saying and I think spec you think similar - is that the likely SOFAD would be in the range 22-28K. My own range is bigger than that given the uncertainty in many assumptions. But the mean revolves around 24-26K range which is hardly going to cross Dec 06.

That's why still struggling with your 35K claim.

Q lets think it over differently, Iam giving my original prediction with EB1=3.5K and EB2 ROW 10K last year and also EB1=13.5K and EB2 ROW = 0 last year. Iam going by your old definition of SOFAD which includes the annual allocation as well.
- We agree that EB2 ROW and EB1 SOFAD was 13.5K. I believe we all agree the answer is yes.
- I would apply not having FB to the categories individually assuming that their cap was never exhausted and thereby was never a hurdle in them getting any extra numbers even more than what they got. Also the loss of not having FB is 6.5K not 10K as the FB itself was 9.2K and the part of it went to EB4 and EB5 which never came to EB2 anyway.
Now lets analyze on Trackitt to see the trend for October to December
Year 2009 (Oct to Dec) EB2 ROW – 190 EB2 NIW – 27 Total – 207
EB1A – 46 EB1B – 87 EB1C – 63 Total - 196
Year 2010 (Oct to Dec) EB2 ROW – 122 EB2 NIW – 13 Total - 135
EB1A – 16 EB1B – 18 EB1B – 19 Total – 53
- Some known facts are a) Total 2010 SOFAD - 26.5K (AILA Report). b) EB5 - 7.5K From reliable published reports. c) India & China Annual Cap - 6K. For this year FB spillover has been assumed to be 0. Effectively SOFAD from EB2 ROW and EB1 = 26.5 - 7.5 - 6 = 13K.
Original Prediction - For the rest of the calculations I assume that probably 10K came from EB2 ROW and 3.5K came from EB1. Adjustment for NO FB this Year = -6.5K. Nett SOFAD from EB2 ROW and EB1 without FB would be 13K - 6.5K = 6.5K.
The drop in EB1 appears to be really drastic however I feel it is not being adequately represented. However looks like the EB1 consumption could drop this year compared to last year though. .
Consumption last year = 43000 - 3500 = 39500.
If we assume a drop of 25% (Extremely conservative) the consumption will be 29625
However this year we are back to the regular cap so SOFAD = 40320-26925 ~ 11K
If we assume a drop of 50% (Extremely Optimistic) the consumption will be 19750
However this year we are back to the regular cap so SOFAD = 40320-19750 ~ 20K
For the conservative calculation let’s just go ahead with 11K.
For EB2 the data appears to be good.
EB2 ROW consumption last year = 40320 - 6000 - 10000 = 24320.
Now the trend shows that the consumption is (135/207) * 24320 ~ 16K.
So potential SOFAD out of EB2 ROW will be 34K - 16K ~ 18K.
EB5 SOFAD I expect will decline from 7K to 5K.
Hence total SOFAD that we can expect in 2011 = 11 + 18 + 5 = 34K.
- We agree that even in the most optimistic scenario for EB2 ROW would not have consumed beyond its cap.
To create your scenario let’s put the EB2 ROW consumption to be 42970 - 6000 = 36970.
Lets apply the 1/3 rd factor to this the Nett reduction comes to be 12323.
This year the cap is cap is only 40320. Nett EB2 ROW SOFAD therefore comes out to be 40320-5600-36970+12323 ~ 10K.
Now let’s analyze EB1 similarly. EB1 cap last year was ~ 43.5K out of which 13.5K lets say came as SOFAD so EB1 consumption last year was 30K.
Factoring in a 25% reduction it would come to a 22.5K consumption. So the SOFAD will be 40320 - 22500 ~= 18K.
Nett SOFAD by this way comes out to be 18 + 10 + 5 (EB5) + 5.6 K ~= 38K.
This final outcome comes out to be somewhat similar when I assumed EB1 gave 3.5K and EB2 ROW gave 10K. However this approach has a huge risk, Eb1 usage is known to surprise and if this 18K could well be 5-8K so the SOFAD could come in the 25-28K range, this however maybe a conservative calculation.

[qesehmk]

Teddy thanks. There are some minor kinks in your calculations but not worth discussing.

The biggest takeaway for me is that you are relying on 33% YoY reduction in EB2ROW demand and 25% YoY reduction on EB1 demand.

I think that's a significant assumption. Trackitt data certainly supports both assumptions. I am somewhat ok with ROW assumption but remember the labor data is in conflict with that assumption.

Regarding EB1, I would actually tend to agree with that assumption direction except that I would avoid coming to any conclusion when the number of cases is only in single digits. The reduced YoY trackitt demand certainly tells you that cycle time for EB1-485 has reduced greatly and EB1 folks don't bother to record their application in trackitt. What it doesn't tell you is that whether the throughput has decreased.

However, in both cases I certainly think that trackitt data provides silver lining to otherwise ominous signs present in both categories. Thanks ... now we are in sync in terms of our understanding of where the 35K SOFAD prediction comes from.


Q lets think it over differently, Iam giving my original prediction with EB1=3.5K and EB2 ROW 10K last year and also EB1=13.5K and EB2 ROW = 0 last year. Iam going by your old definition of SOFAD which includes the annual allocation as well.
- We agree that EB2 ROW and EB1 SOFAD was 13.5K. I believe we all agree the answer is yes.
- I would apply not having FB to the categories individually assuming that their cap was never exhausted and thereby was never a hurdle in them getting any extra numbers even more than what they got. Also the loss of not having FB is 6.5K not 10K as the FB itself was 9.2K and the part of it went to EB4 and EB5 which never came to EB2 anyway.
Now lets analyze on Trackitt to see the trend for October to December
Year 2009 (Oct to Dec) EB2 ROW – 190 EB2 NIW – 27 Total – 207
EB1A – 46 EB1B – 87 EB1C – 63 Total - 196
Year 2010 (Oct to Dec) EB2 ROW – 122 EB2 NIW – 13 Total - 135
EB1A – 16 EB1B – 18 EB1B – 19 Total – 53
- Some known facts are a) Total 2010 SOFAD - 26.5K (AILA Report). b) EB5 - 7.5K From reliable published reports. c) India & China Annual Cap - 6K. For this year FB spillover has been assumed to be 0. Effectively SOFAD from EB2 ROW and EB1 = 26.5 - 7.5 - 6 = 13K.
Original Prediction - For the rest of the calculations I assume that probably 10K came from EB2 ROW and 3.5K came from EB1. Adjustment for NO FB this Year = -6.5K. Nett SOFAD from EB2 ROW and EB1 without FB would be 13K - 6.5K = 6.5K.
The drop in EB1 appears to be really drastic however I feel it is not being adequately represented. However looks like the EB1 consumption could drop this year compared to last year though. .
Consumption last year = 43000 - 3500 = 39500.
If we assume a drop of 25% (Extremely conservative) the consumption will be 29625
However this year we are back to the regular cap so SOFAD = 40320-26925 ~ 11K
If we assume a drop of 50% (Extremely Optimistic) the consumption will be 19750
However this year we are back to the regular cap so SOFAD = 40320-19750 ~ 20K
For the conservative calculation let’s just go ahead with 11K.
For EB2 the data appears to be good.
EB2 ROW consumption last year = 40320 - 6000 - 10000 = 24320.
Now the trend shows that the consumption is (135/207) * 24320 ~ 16K.
So potential SOFAD out of EB2 ROW will be 34K - 16K ~ 18K.
EB5 SOFAD I expect will decline from 7K to 5K.
Hence total SOFAD that we can expect in 2011 = 11 + 18 + 5 = 34K.
- We agree that even in the most optimistic scenario for EB2 ROW would not have consumed beyond its cap.
To create your scenario let’s put the EB2 ROW consumption to be 42970 - 6000 = 36970.
Lets apply the 1/3 rd factor to this the Nett reduction comes to be 12323.
This year the cap is cap is only 40320. Nett EB2 ROW SOFAD therefore comes out to be 40320-5600-36970+12323 ~ 10K.
Now let’s analyze EB1 similarly. EB1 cap last year was ~ 43.5K out of which 13.5K lets say came as SOFAD so EB1 consumption last year was 30K.
Factoring in a 25% reduction it would come to a 22.5K consumption. So the SOFAD will be 40320 - 22500 ~= 18K.
Nett SOFAD by this way comes out to be 18 + 10 + 5 (EB5) + 5.6 K ~= 38K.
This final outcome comes out to be somewhat similar when I assumed EB1 gave 3.5K and EB2 ROW gave 10K. However this approach has a huge risk, Eb1 usage is known to surprise and if this 18K could well be 5-8K so the SOFAD could come in the 25-28K range, this however maybe a conservative calculation.

[Spectator]

My understanding was that SOFAD, despite the name, actually referred to Spillover + Normal Country allocation.

On that basis, Teddy's 5 + 11 + 18 = 34k Spillover is actually 39.6k SOFAD once China and India's 5.6k allocation is added on.

Please let me know what is the accepted definition of SOFAD. I explained it as above in a FAQ. I need to amend it if the definition has changed. :confused:

[qesehmk]

Your understanding is correct. This was one of the minor kinks I mentioned in Teddy's post. He does refer to Nett(sic) SOFAD at 38K in one place but forgot prior to that. But that's ok. I guess the main takeway/question is we will or will we see those reductions that trackitt data is supporting. I am not quite sure yet. Lets wait a quarter ...(or until the USCIS report comes... whatever is early.)


My understanding was that SOFAD, despite the name, actually referred to Spillover + Normal Country allocation.

On that basis, Teddy's 5 + 11 + 18 = 34k Spillover is actually 39.6k SOFAD once China and India's 5.6k allocation is added on.

Please let me know what is the accepted definition of SOFAD. I explained it as above in a FAQ. I need to amend it if the definition has changed. :confused:

[TeddyKoochu]

My understanding was that SOFAD, despite the name, actually referred to Spillover + Normal Country allocation.

On that basis, Teddy's 5 + 11 + 18 = 34k Spillover is actually 39.6k SOFAD once China and India's 5.6k allocation is added on.

Please let me know what is the accepted definition of SOFAD. I explained it as above in a FAQ. I need to amend it if the definition has changed. :confused:

Spec, you have the right definition for SOFAD I missed adding the 5.6K at the line you mentioned. SOFAD is a term that Q had coined it in essence means numbers from all possible sources for a given category.

[qesehmk]

Teddy .. I liked your explanation. So beautifully put!
Spec, you have the right definition for SOFAD I missed adding the 5.6K at the line you mentioned. SOFAD is a term that Q had coined it in essence means numbers from all possible sources for a given category.

[Spectator]

Teddy .. I liked your explanation. So beautifully put!
Agreed.

In fact, so good, I have updated the FAQ to include it.

[TeddyKoochu]

Agreed.

In fact, so good, I have updated the FAQ to include it.

Thanks Spec Iam glad you have forgivven me for missing the 5.6K now:). Guys I assume I was using this 5.6K in my original prediction for the range of 2 months Feb - Apr 2007 missed to add it here though. Q & Spec please point out all calculation errors and glitches at all times it will help not only to improve the accuracy but add to clarity !

[qesehmk]

Teddy,

Friction is where we learn something. So no worries with our differences in opinion. These differences help all of us by putting forth various views and vet opinions and facts.

We have been respectful of each other and with all others. And thats how we need to be if we were of any value to anybody. Difference in viewpoint is a very useful thing.

Pls keep it up!!


Thanks Spec Iam glad you have forgivven me for missing the 5.6K now:). Guys I assume I was using this 5.6K in my original prediction for the range of 2 months Feb - Apr 2007 missed to add it here though. Q & Spec please point out all calculation errors and glitches at all times it will help not only to improve the accuracy but add to clarity !

[srinivasj]

Regarding EB1, I would actually tend to agree with that assumption direction except that I would avoid coming to any conclusion when the number of cases is only in single digits. The reduced YoY trackitt demand certainly tells you that cycle time for EB1-485 has reduced greatly and EB1 folks don't bother to record their application in trackitt. What it doesn't tell you is that whether the throughput has decreased.

I was told today that EB1 took just 3 months for a friend of my friend..not sure how accurate that is..

[qesehmk]

I wouldn't be surprised if it were true. Things have become much more efficient at USCIS and possibly volumes may have reduced (scant evidence - refer to trackitt).



I was told today that EB1 took just 3 months for a friend of my friend..not sure how accurate that is..

[Spectator]

Thanks Spec Iam glad you have forgivven me for missing the 5.6K now:). Guys I assume I was using this 5.6K in my original prediction for the range of 2 months Feb - Apr 2007 missed to add it here though. Q & Spec please point out all calculation errors and glitches at all times it will help not only to improve the accuracy but add to clarity !
Teddy,

I think that is the beauty of a forum like this. It allows a second or third pair of eyes to run over the data. In hindsight, I do wonder whether a PM would have been a better method of discussing it with you though.

As Q says healthy and lively debate is positively advantageous. There can be a danger that what is meant as constructive criticism or a debating point can be taken more negatively. Given my direct style, I am all too aware of that. I hope everybody realizes by now that I never mean to cause offence.

I've already learnt a lot from the discussions on the forum.

I like the way that you factor in PWMB on a sliding scale - it is something I would like to incorporate myself - I haven't quite figured out how to do that yet. I think I probably overestimate it at the moment.

Conversely, I think that your CP numbers might be a little high, if they only cover Consular cases. The average monthly number for India & China combined is 1,106, so 100 a month represents 9%. In the last few years, it has been running at around 1%.

It might be something to consider, even if it combines FO cases as well.

On a fun note - I have all sorts of charts, trying desperately to see patterns from the chaos (unsuccessfully). I thought this one at least visualized how the differences look between Teddy at the high end and myself at the low end.

I don't claim it shows anything else - please treat it as a bit of fun!

Also on a fun note, I calculated the figures where Teddy and my predictions cross. It would result in SOFAD of just over 27k, which would translate to mid December 2006 in Teddy's model and around Dec 22 2006 in mine.

I don't claim that the crossing point is significant.

52

PS It might be worth noting that the new Spillover interpretation started being applied in FY2008.

[qesehmk]

Spec

Very nice graph. It tells the story so well ... that ROW is gaining at the expense of EB2I. EB2C as can be seen is going down in its usage on its own.


Teddy,

I think that is the beauty of a forum like this. It allows a second or third pair of eyes to run over the data. In hindsight, I do wonder whether a PM would have been a better method of discussing it with you though.

As Q says healthy and lively debate is positively advantageous. There can be a danger that what is meant as constructive criticism or a debating point can be taken more negatively. Given my direct style, I am all too aware of that. I hope everybody realizes by now that I never mean to cause offence.

I've already learnt a lot from the discussions on the forum.

I like the way that you factor in PWMB on a sliding scale - it is something I would like to incorporate myself - I haven't quite figured out how to do that yet. I think I probably overestimate it at the moment.

Conversely, I think that your CP numbers might be a little high, if they only cover Consular cases. The average monthly number for India & China combined is 1,106, so 100 a month represents 9%. In the last few years, it has been running at around 1%.

It might be something to consider, even if it combines FO cases as well.

On a fun note - I have all sorts of charts, trying desperately to see patterns from the chaos (unsuccessfully). I thought this one at least visualized how the differences look between Teddy at the high end and myself at the low end.

I don't claim it shows anything else - please treat it as a bit of fun!

Also on a fun note, I calculated the figures where Teddy and my predictions cross. It would result in SOFAD of just over 27k, which would translate to mid December 2006 in Teddy's model and around Dec 22 2006 in mine.

I don't claim that the crossing point is significant.

52

[Spectator]

Spec

Very nice graph. It tells the story so well ... that ROW is gaining at the expense of EB2I. EB2C as can be seen is going down in its usage on its own.

Hmm, I am not sure about that. The chart shows % use not number use. So if SOFAD is low, then ROW will have a very high %.

See what you make of this chart which plots the same, but by number use. It tells a different story.

54

[qesehmk]

I think this second one is also interesting and tell the same story as first one. PLUS it shows that EB2I, contrary to common sense, is not doing as well under horizontal spillover as earlier thought. One can see when vertical changed to horizontal.

If that's not what those two are showing then what are they showing in your opinion?


Hmm, I am not sure about that. The chart shows % use not number use. So if SOFAD is low, then ROW will have a very high %.

See what you make of this chart which plots the same, but by number use. It tells a different story.

54

[TeddyKoochu]

Teddy,

I think that is the beauty of a forum like this. It allows a second or third pair of eyes to run over the data. In hindsight, I do wonder whether a PM would have been a better method of discussing it with you though.

As Q says healthy and lively debate is positively advantageous. There can be a danger that what is meant as constructive criticism or a debating point can be taken more negatively. Given my direct style, I am all too aware of that. I hope everybody realizes by now that I never mean to cause offence.

I've already learnt a lot from the discussions on the forum.

I like the way that you factor in PWMB on a sliding scale - it is something I would like to incorporate myself - I haven't quite figured out how to do that yet. I think I probably overestimate it at the moment.

Conversely, I think that your CP numbers might be a little high, if they only cover Consular cases. The average monthly number for India & China combined is 1,106, so 100 a month represents 9%. In the last few years, it has been running at around 1%.

It might be something to consider, even if it combines FO cases as well.

On a fun note - I have all sorts of charts, trying desperately to see patterns from the chaos (unsuccessfully). I thought this one at least visualized how the differences look between Teddy at the high end and myself at the low end.

I don't claim it shows anything else - please treat it as a bit of fun!

Also on a fun note, I calculated the figures where Teddy and my predictions cross. It would result in SOFAD of just over 27k, which would translate to mid December 2006 in Teddy's model and around Dec 22 2006 in mine.

I don't claim that the crossing point is significant.

52

PS It might be worth noting that the new Spillover interpretation started being applied in FY2008.

Spec, I greatly appreciate your insights and analysis, you are not only very thorough and detailed but you are even more courteous and polite and all your posts are extremely balanced they are not overly conservative. Iam fully and completely privileged debating and learning with yourself and Q and all others on the forum. I wish my manager were also like that :). The fact is that all of us know a few things but together we may know almost everything the key is to let this constructive debate go on and keep refining. Predictions and calculations is more like weather forecasting!

[bieber]

Spec, initially i thought u were little direct (read it rude), but after reading ur posts for a while i think u r very detailed, thorough.

Q, Teddy, Spec great learning experience from u guys, keep it up

[Spectator]

I think this second one is also interesting and tell the same story as first one. PLUS it shows that EB2I, contrary to common sense, is not doing as well under horizontal spillover as earlier thought. One can see when vertical changed to horizontal.

If that's not what those two are showing then what are they showing in your opinion?Q,

I wanted to start by addressing your comment about the first graph.

If the non retrogressed Countries used all their allocation, they would use 34k and I&C would use 6k. The % for non retrogressed Countries would be 85% (34/40). That represents the theoretical normal %.

If there is Spillover of 20k (from Countries other than EB2) and non retrogressed Countries use their full allocation of 34k, then the % drops to 56.7% because it is now 34/60.

The non retrogressed Countries are not taking any visas at the expense of I&C.

It is quite possible for I&C to receive higher numbers, if the SOFAD contribution from EB1, EB4 & EB5 rises, even if EB2-Current uses its allocation. If they don't that just helps even more.

I think you have to be wary of looking back at previous years. So many different things were going on in them that they may not be directly comparable.

What I would say is that EB2-I appears to have received 37% of all available visas issued in EB2 in FY2010. I think that is a pretty good result for a single Country. I think the only other years with higher figures were as a result of Visa Recapture.

Using Teddy's figures EB2-I would receive 57% of all available EB2 visas in FY2011 or using mine 33%. I don't think either result is at all shabby.

[Spectator]

Spec, initially i thought u were little direct (read it rude), but after reading ur posts for a while i think u r very detailed, thorough.

Q, Teddy, Spec great learning experience from u guys, keep it up

bieber,

I appreciate your honest and direct comment. It is better if someone states that it is how it is perceived - certainly for me.

I came to the realization that my direct style and immediately speaking what was on my mind was being mistaken for rudeness and lack of respect - the last thing I wanted to convey.

I've tried to tone it down and I think the conversation is the better for it.

I can't promise to always get it right - but I am trying! LOL :D

[qesehmk]

Spec

Your explanation is valid from mathematical point of view. But I am looking at it from "who is in the line first". From that perspective EB2ROW is gaining at the expense of EB2I&C. Secondly the timing of PERM expediting also was interesting to say the least. Otherwise significant EB2I would be cleared last year itself as we had predicted in Jan 10.


Q,

I wanted to start by addressing your comment about the first graph.

If the non retrogressed Countries used all their allocation, they would use 34k and I&C would use 6k. The % for non retrogressed Countries would be 85% (34/40). That represents the theoretical normal %.

If there is Spillover of 20k (from Countries other than EB2) and non retrogressed Countries use their full allocation of 34k, then the % drops to 56.7% because it is now 34/60.

The non retrogressed Countries are not taking any visas at the expense of I&C.

It is quite possible for I&C to receive higher numbers, if the SOFAD contribution from EB1, EB4 & EB5 rises, even if EB2-Current uses its allocation. If they don't that just helps even more.

I think you have to be wary of looking back at previous years. So many different things were going on in them that they may not be directly comparable.

What I would say is that EB2-I appears to have received 37% of all available visas issued in EB2 in FY2010. I think that is a pretty good result for a single Country. I think the only other years with higher figures were as a result of Visa Recapture.

Using Teddy's figures EB2-I would receive 57% of all available EB2 visas in FY2011 or using mine 33%. I don't think either result is at all shabby.

[TeddyKoochu]

Teddy,

Let me start by saying that I enjoy our conversations immensely. I find them very stimulating and they make me think about the issues and assumptions even more. We appear to be polar opposites in that you are the ultra optimist and I am the ultra conservative. I think that is a good thing for the forum.

To answer your question:

The 70,237 and 21,533 represent all Countries and all Categories, not just EB2-ROW, Mexico & Philippines.

Lets just look at the CY2010 cases. I say this because many or most of the other years will be due to backlog, which wouldn't be a factor for FY2011 and it is these (actually FY2010) figures that the calculation in kd2008 post is based on.

The last 4 months of FY2010 had 16,064 cases approved that were submitted in CY2010 by all Countries.

We also know that there were a total of 18,050 cases submitted in CY2010 by all Countries approved in the whole of FY2010, so only 1,986 can have been approved in the first 8 months of FY2010.

That implies that 4,016 per month current (in fact not all current since the FY began in October) cases were being approved at the end of the year, compared to 248 per month over the first 8 months. That is for all Countries, not just EB2-ROW.

For EB2-ROW all we can say is that of the 16,064 cases submitted in CY2010 and approved in the last 4 months, EB2-ROW accounted for 5,799 of them.

What is missing is the corresponding breakdown by FY submission for all Countries over the last 4 months and the FY submission breakdown for ROW for the whole of FY2010. I might see if I can compile the figures from the data I have.

In fact, I have studied kd2008 post in more detail and found that the calculation was actually very conservative.

It was based only on applications submitted in the current FY. Judging by the evidence, it excluded any contribution from cases coming out of audit and largely ignores any normal cases that take longer than average to approve. We could take the % for these to be 16.26% and 5.61% respectively, although I have heard the audit % is rather higher.

If we take into account that you believe the denial rate at I-140/I-485 stage is 20%, then these would pretty much cancel each other out and the figures would remain as they are.

Spec my sincerest thanks to you, I agree that the last 4 months of 2010 surge is fairly significant and it does translate to a high pipeline and the same should be hitting the 485 queue very soon. Thanks to kd2008 for the wonderful formula besides Sangiano for the analysis. If we actually see this kind of a hit on the 485 pipeline EB2 ROW SOFAD will be far lesser than what Iam projecting and if this rate keeps up it may well be nothing. The data clearly shows that ROW + Mexico + Philippines is more than 50% and the split of EB2 to EB3 is also going more in the favor of EB2 for obvious reasons even for ROW.

Now Iam trying to somehow validate these figures trying to fit them to 2010 approvals. Now our high level assumption is that perms approved in the last 4 months did not make it to the 485 approval so for the purpose of a rough calculation lets try to calculate based on the first 8 months. 48974 perms would belong to the first 8 months. For the sake of simplicity lets assume ROW + Mexico + Philippines as 50% and EB2 to EB3 also as 50 - 50 this would give ~ 12200 ROW EB2 Perm applications. Multiplying this with the dependant factor as 2.25 we would get 27450 as the ROW figure. Assuming 10% cases did not make it or were denied for whatever reasons this figure comes to 27405. Now this way the ROW SOFAd would have been 43K - 6K (I/C Allocation) - 24K ~ 13K. However if we assume a perfect push forward rate i.e. assuming no denials or miss outs the ROW SOFAD comes to 10K something both me and you have been assuming. The early part of FY 2010 was really very slow for all perm approvals which may not have accounted for very many ROW approvals anyway I mean the later part of 2009 which is part of CY 2009 but part of FY 2010.

To conclude lets keep watching the 485 approvals as well in addition to Perm, I would rewrite my analysis by averaging the 485 approvals for EB2 ROW and EB1 over the entire year and then finding the monthly average for 2009 and compare with whatever we have in 2010 as opposed to comparing corresponding periods, this way we can average based on the whole year rather just a few months. Both these categories had favorable conditions for approval the whole year round without any cap limitations.

[qesehmk]

Teddy if I may ... let me say (and you already know this) that USCIS data is full of anamolies and sometimes you can't take the numbers completely at face value for whatever reason. e.g. if you try to use labor data in absolute terms then at least 15-20K ROW numbers from last year should've been carried into 2011. (a very rough figure mind you!)

However 485 inventory doesn't show spike in ROW inventory. The reason I would expect spike is because even ROW has its own quota and takes some time to process. But we haven';t see such spike. So there are things out there that we don';t fully understand.

So in those situations I would rather rely on different techniques - viz. using multiple data sources or using %changes rather than absolute numbers - just like we did last year.

Just a suggestion.....

p.s. - Funnily enough USCIS dashboard has stopped publishing data. The one I see is from Oct 10. And the monthly reports are as cryptic as they have ever been.

Spec my sincerest thanks to you, I agree that the last 4 months of 2010 surge is fairly significant and it does translate to a high pipeline and the same should be hitting the 485 queue very soon. Thanks to kd2008 for the wonderful formula besides Sangiano for the analysis. If we actually see this kind of a hit on the 485 pipeline EB2 ROW SOFAD will be far lesser than what Iam projecting and if this rate keeps up it may well be nothing. The data clearly shows that ROW + Mexico + Philippines is more than 50% and the split of EB2 to EB3 is also going more in the favor of EB2 for obvious reasons even for ROW.

Now Iam trying to somehow validate these figures trying to fit them to 2010 approvals. Now our high level assumption is that perms approved in the last 4 months did not make it to the 485 approval so for the purpose of a rough calculation lets try to calculate based on the first 8 months. 48974 perms would belong to the first 8 months. For the sake of simplicity lets assume ROW + Mexico + Philippines as 50% and EB2 to EB3 also as 50 - 50 this would give ~ 12200 ROW EB2 Perm applications. Multiplying this with the dependant factor as 2.25 we would get 27450 as the ROW figure. Assuming 10% cases did not make it or were denied for whatever reasons this figure comes to 27405. Now this way the ROW SOFAd would have been 43K - 6K (I/C Allocation) - 24K ~ 13K. However if we assume a perfect push forward rate i.e. assuming no denials or miss outs the ROW SOFAD comes to 10K something both me and you have been assuming. The early part of FY 2010 was really very slow for all perm approvals which may not have accounted for very many ROW approvals anyway I mean the later part of 2009 which is part of CY 2009 but part of FY 2010.

To conclude lets keep watching the 485 approvals as well in addition to Perm, I would rewrite my analysis by averaging the 485 approvals for EB2 ROW and EB1 over the entire year and then finding the monthly average for 2009 and compare with whatever we have in 2010 as opposed to comparing corresponding periods, this way we can average based on the whole year rather just a few months. Both these categories had favorable conditions for approval the whole year round without any cap limitations.

[bieber]

However 485 inventory doesn't show spike in ROW inventory. .

may be Teddy's assumption of 50% of labors to non I+C is wrong, and it may be a 20% or below and u will see the surge when I+C get a chance to file 485 :)

[qesehmk]

Thanks. The % will be at least what it shows on trackitt. It could be more. Honestly I haven't checked.

Regarding I+C surge ... that will be huge when it comes. But above I was only refering to ROW labor approvals and its implications for ROW 485 inventory in EB2.


may be Teddy's assumption of 50% of labors to non I+C is wrong, and it may be a 20% or below and u will see the surge when I+C get a chance to file 485 :)

[TeddyKoochu]

Teddy if I may ... let me say (and you already know this) that USCIS data is full of anamolies and sometimes you can't take the numbers completely at face value for whatever reason. e.g. if you try to use labor data in absolute terms then at least 15-20K ROW numbers from last year should've been carried into 2011. (a very rough figure mind you!)

However 485 inventory doesn't show spike in ROW inventory. The reason I would expect spike is because even ROW has its own quota and takes some time to process. But we haven';t see such spike. So there are things out there that we don';t fully understand.

So in those situations I would rather rely on different techniques - viz. using multiple data sources or using %changes rather than absolute numbers - just like we did last year.

Just a suggestion.....

p.s. - Funnily enough USCIS dashboard has stopped publishing data. The one I see is from Oct 10. And the monthly reports are as cryptic as they have ever been.

Q thanks, I agree with you that the percent reduction approach is really the best one this is one of the key things I picked up and learnt from your predictions and calculations. In the Trackitt calculations that i have presented to you I used that, last year the error in this approach was around 6.5K, I had done it after the fact Trackitt gave me 33K however actual was 26.5K. So for an approximation of SOFAD I used the I/C annual cap as a buffer but still this figure is 35K way more than anybody else is projecting. On the perm figures Iam struggling to reconcile them with my mind, somehow my heart is telling me that they are high (That maybe due to my own desire to have the dates move further), however if these absolute numbers are true the situation will be tough and it will definitely extend the GC dreams of many by atleast a year. The perm analysis looks really good and our good friend Spec has been really kind in explaining the same over and over. On the dashboard I could never decipher anything out of it seems to be more for high level management reporting than for anything else. The thing that could help us is if they could start publishing how many cases are approved every month per category this likely may not happen in the foreseeable future, I somehow find Trackitt to be the best source to measure the consumption.

[TeddyKoochu]

may be Teddy's assumption of 50% of labors to non I+C is wrong, and it may be a 20% or below and u will see the surge when I+C get a chance to file 485 :)

20-30% was my original projection however nobody agrees to that so I went by 50-50 a Spec suggested. Maybe in the current times everybody now is trying extra hard for EB2. If its really 20-30 then it will be a great situation for EB2 I/C.

[Spectator]

Spec

Your explanation is valid from mathematical point of view. But I am looking at it from "who is in the line first". From that perspective EB2ROW is gaining at the expense of EB2I&C. Secondly the timing of PERM expediting also was interesting to say the least. Otherwise significant EB2I would be cleared last year itself as we had predicted in Jan 10.Q,

Sure.

But that's just a debate about the merits of the initial 7% per Country allocation. I don't want to get into that.

[kd2008]

20-30% was my original projection however nobody agrees to that so I went by 50-50 a Spec suggested. Maybe in the current times everybody now is trying extra hard for EB2. If its really 20-30 then it will be a great situation for EB2 I/C.

If you look at the PERM data for FY 2010, I+C (EB2+EB3) is 50% of total. hence the suggestion, I think. If any thing, I+C (EB2) may be 70% of EB2 total. Which is even better for Spillover but who knows??

[qesehmk]

That's fine. Country quota is discriminatory and hurtful to large countries esp China and India.

p.s. BTW if you don't mind I will use those two charts you created in the header for everybody's benefit. Pls let me know if ok. If you think they need cleanup or corrections and want to wait ... that's fine too.


Q,

Sure.

But that's just a debate about the merits of the initial 7% per Country allocation. I don't want to get into that.

[Spectator]

Spec my sincerest thanks to you, I agree that the last 4 months of 2010 surge is fairly significant and it does translate to a high pipeline and the same should be hitting the 485 queue very soon. Thanks to kd2008 for the wonderful formula besides Sangiano for the analysis.Teddy,

If it was of any help to you then that good to hear.


The early part of FY 2010 was really very slow for all perm approvals which may not have accounted for very many ROW approvals anyway I mean the later part of 2009 which is part of CY 2009 but part of FY 2010.
I promised to try and reconstruct the FY2010 PERM data for ROW (excluding M & P) into FY of submission and to see what the first 8 months looked like.

I've finished that. Maybe the figures below will be of some assistance to you.

All Applications

Year ----- No ---- - % - - Days Pending
FY2010 -- 9,986 -- 32.59% --- 123
FY2009 - 16,521 -- 53.91% --- 296
FY2008 -- 3,764 -- 12.28% --- 749
FY2007 ---- 348 --- 1.14% --- 918
FY2006 ----- 23 --- 0.08% - 1,363
FY2005 ------ 2 --- 0.01% - 1,754

Total -- 30,644 - 100.00%

First 8 months Approvals

Year ----- No ---- - % - - Days Pending
FY2010 -- 3,492 -- 15.65% --- 157
FY2009 - 16,053 -- 71.96% --- 293
FY2008 -- 2,408 -- 10.79% --- 731
FY2007 ---- 334 --- 1.50% --- 907
FY2006 ----- 19 --- 0.09% - 1,321
FY2005 ------ 1 --- 0.00% - 1,590

Total -- 22,307 - 100.00%

Last 4 months Approvals

Year ----- No ---- - % - - Days Pending
FY2010 -- 6,494 -- 77.89% --- 105
FY2009 ---- 468 --- 5.61% --- 386
FY2008 -- 1,356 -- 16.26% --- 779
FY2007 ----- 14 --- 0.17% - 1,176
FY2006 ------ 4 --- 0.05% - 1,562
FY2005 ------ 1 --- 0.01% - 1,918

Total --- 8,337 - 100.00%

A quick look says that the majority of the backlog reduction related to FY2009 cases and that the vast majority of that had been completed in the first 8 months. That might be a bit simplistic though.


To conclude lets keep watching the 485 approvals as well in addition to Perm, I would rewrite my analysis by averaging the 485 approvals for EB2 ROW and EB1 over the entire year and then finding the monthly average for 2009 and compare with whatever we have in 2010 as opposed to comparing corresponding periods, this way we can average based on the whole year rather just a few months. Both these categories had favorable conditions for approval the whole year round without any cap limitations.
I think we have reached a consensus about this.

If we use a multi-faceted approach and give regard to data and trends from all sources, we might achieve more clarity.

The optimistic trend from Trackitt is tempered by the more pessimistic PERM view and vice versa.

Q,

I don't think they have stopped updating the dashboard - they are just very slow in doing so for some reason. USCIS only added the Oct 2010 figures about 3 weeks ago.

[geevikram]

Thanks guys for all the analysis. So are we sticking onto the original prediction for cut-off dates?

[qesehmk]

Usually they used to have a 40 days lag. Now its been over 100 days and they haven't updated.


Q,
I don't think they have stopped updating the dashboard - they are just very slow in doing so for some reason. USCIS only added the Oct 2010 figures about 3 weeks ago.


Thanks guys for all the analysis. So are we sticking onto the original prediction for cut-off dates?
I think we are hovering around Jan-Mar 07. But there are discussions (optimistic and pessimistic ones) that leads one to consider extreme scenarios such as May 07 (best case) OR Oct-Nov 06 (Worst Case) for EB2I.

[kd2008]

Usually they used to have a 40 days lag. Now its been over 100 days and they haven't updated.




I think we are hovering around Jan-Mar 07. But there are discussions (optimistic and pessimistic ones) that leads one to consider extreme scenarios such as May 07 (best case) OR Oct-Nov 06 (Worst Case) for EB2I.

http://dashboard.uscis.gov/

It is now updated for Nov.

[TeluguBidda]

http://dashboard.uscis.gov/

It is now updated for Nov.

Did anyone notice the unusual spike in I-140 applications at TSC? Trend Chart shows this spike starting May 2010. Perhaps porting related? The same spike was not there in I-485 applications, so I was thinking that it may related to porting cases.

[qesehmk]

http://dashboard.uscis.gov/

It is now updated for Nov.

Thanks KD. Will take a look ...


Did anyone notice the unusual spike in I-140 applications at TSC? Trend Chart shows this spike starting May 2010. Perhaps porting related? The same spike was not there in I-485 applications, so I was thinking that it may related to porting cases.

It looks like they are redirecting all 140s to TSC. As per the increase in backlog, it was expected after the acceleration in PERM processing. Remember these include all categories all countries ... since one can file 140 right after labor. So not all of them will flow through 485 immediately.

But even if you assume 50% are ROW & 50% of that are ROW EB2 then that could be nearly sufficient to choke EB2I. Again .... sorry for the grim prognosis..but its better to be clear about whats in store. In fact these are the thigns that run contrary to trackitt approval trend which is showing significant reduction in EB1 and EB2ROW.

[bieber]

Q,

in 2009, H1 quota lasted till nov, this year it's still open. just an observation on how the new workforce is getting into the system, for backlog reduction it doesn't matter if Ind+China people applying for new labors but ROW matters.
I'm trying to understand the reason behind ur grim outlook

[kd2008]

Thanks KD. Will take a look ...



It looks like they are redirecting all 140s to TSC. As per the increase in backlog, it was expected after the acceleration in PERM processing. Remember these include all categories all countries ... since one can file 140 right after labor. So not all of them will flow through 485 immediately.

But even if you assume 50% are ROW & 50% of that are ROW EB2 then that could be nearly sufficient to choke EB2I. Again .... sorry for the grim prognosis..but its better to be clear about whats in store. In fact these are the thigns that run contrary to trackitt approval trend which is showing significant reduction in EB1 and EB2ROW.

One of the reasons why the trackitt data is reduced may be because the turn around time is so small. If my labor is getting approved in 20 days and my attorney tells me I will get a green card in 4 months after filing for I-140, then why would I want to even bother with finding out about whats happening with others? Just trying to understand the decrease here. Help me if you think there might be reasons other than decrease in the number of filings.

[TeluguBidda]

But even if you assume 50% are ROW & 50% of that are ROW EB2 then that could be nearly sufficient to choke EB2I. Again .... sorry for the grim prognosis..but its better to be clear about whats in store. In fact these are the thigns that run contrary to trackitt approval trend which is showing significant reduction in EB1 and EB2ROW.

So, the earlier worst-case scenario of Oct-Nov 06 holds good OR does it appear like it is going to be more worse?

[qesehmk]

bieber

Good question. I think the grim outlook doesn't come from current year demand but from opening the floodgates of PERM approvals.
ROW also saw that surge in PERMs last year which killed EB2IC hopes. So in other words ...while 2010-11 ROW labor applications may be low, its the pentup demand from prior years in ROW which is now being realized after they are getting through labor stage.



Q,

in 2009, H1 quota lasted till nov, this year it's still open. just an observation on how the new workforce is getting into the system, for backlog reduction it doesn't matter if Ind+China people applying for new labors but ROW matters.
I'm trying to understand the reason behind ur grim outlook

[qesehmk]

One of the reasons why the trackitt data is reduced may be because the turn around time is so small. If my labor is getting approved in 20 days and my attorney tells me I will get a green card in 4 months after filing for I-140, then why would I want to even bother with finding out about whats happening with others? Just trying to understand the decrease here. Help me if you think there might be reasons other than decrease in the number of filings.
Exactly. That's how I look at it.

[qesehmk]

As of now I think that scenario doesn't need to get worse.

So, the earlier worst-case scenario of Oct-Nov 06 holds good OR does it appear like it is going to be more worse?

[TeddyKoochu]

One of the reasons why the trackitt data is reduced may be because the turn around time is so small. If my labor is getting approved in 20 days and my attorney tells me I will get a green card in 4 months after filing for I-140, then why would I want to even bother with finding out about whats happening with others? Just trying to understand the decrease here. Help me if you think there might be reasons other than decrease in the number of filings.


Exactly. That's how I look at it.

Friends refer to the following turn around times from TSC

I-140 - July 7, 2010
I-485 - June 26, 2010

Based on that I140 and I485 are still taking a while so there is a 6 month time lag for the new demand to hit the 485 queue. Additionally I140 approvals are still hard. Faster approvals are coming for porting cases where the previous 485 is already preadjudicated. Both EB2 ROW and EB1 were also current last year so the inclination / disinclination to create / update profiles should not change drastically. Lets hope for the best.

[qesehmk]

Teddy

Makes sense. However thats the only way as of now how we can explain the disconnect between trackitt trend vs PERM & 140 data.


Friends refer to the following turn around times from TSC

I-140 - July 7, 2010
I-485 - June 26, 2010

Based on that I140 and I485 are still taking a while so there is a 6 month time lag for the new demand to hit the 485 queue. Additionally I140 approvals are still hard. Faster approvals are coming for porting cases where the previous 485 is already preadjudicated. Both EB2 ROW and EB1 were also current last year so the inclination / disinclination to create / update profiles should not change drastically. Lets hope for the best.

[TeddyKoochu]

Q Thanks, I agree. I believe that the prediction of the most pessimistic scenario as Oct - Nov 2006 is very tough, it would be almost terrible for everybody not only those who have a close miss but for all others further ahead in the queue. Is this the point with 22K SOFAD as Spec had calculated, I must admit that nothing is impossible and it is extremely prudent to know about the worse case scenario as well. If this scenario happens then it would be a really sad day for all the hopes that we have for Jul – Sep 2011.

[Spectator]

Friends refer to the following turn around times from TSC

I-140 - July 7, 2010
I-485 - June 26, 2010

Based on that I140 and I485 are still taking a while so there is a 6 month time lag for the new demand to hit the 485 queue. Additionally I140 approvals are still hard. Faster approvals are coming for porting cases where the previous 485 is already preadjudicated. Both EB2 ROW and EB1 were also current last year so the inclination / disinclination to create / update profiles should not change drastically. Lets hope for the best.
I think kd's idea is interesting. As you say, let's hope for the best.

To be honest, I've always thought of the Processing Dates as a "you can't enquire about your application until it is at least this old" message rather than being rooted in any reality. I suppose it might represent an average of some kind.

The fact that it has increased to over 4 months does indicate some backlogs.

From memory, EB2-ROW cases on Trackitt generally get approved in 3-4 months, although sometimes longer.

I agree that not much has changed since last year in terms of the I-485s.

However, PP only became available in mid 2009 and the overall process used to take a lot longer for many, when the I-140 generally took much longer to approve. I don't think Porting into EB2-ROW is a great issue at this time.

[qesehmk]

Q Thanks, I agree. I believe that the prediction of the most pessimistic scenario as Oct - Nov 2006 is very tough, it would be almost terrible for everybody not only those who have a close miss but for all others further ahead in the queue. Is this the point with 22K SOFAD as Spec had calculated, I must admit that nothing is impossible and it is extremely prudent to know about the worse case scenario as well. If this scenario happens then it would be a really sad day for all the hopes that we have for Jul – Sep 2011.

Yes. For sure it will be terrible for lot of EB2IC folks. The whole push behind clearing PERM and 140 to pave way for ROW itself is so unfair and suspicious. As I said ... people need to really think about their careers and life plans rather than hang their hat on when exactly the GC will arrive.

Someday it will arrrive for sure. But just hang in their and do something you really love. Dont let your dreams become hostage to GC. I personally have done that and regret that I kept waiting on GC to pursue some of the things that I really wanted to do long time back.

[Spectator]

Q Thanks, I agree. I believe that the prediction of the most pessimistic scenario as Oct - Nov 2006 is very tough, it would be almost terrible for everybody not only those who have a close miss but for all others further ahead in the queue. Is this the point with 22K SOFAD as Spec had calculated, I must admit that nothing is impossible and it is extremely prudent to know about the worse case scenario as well. If this scenario happens then it would be a really sad day for all the hopes that we have for Jul – Sep 2011.Teddy,

If it's any consolation, my latest forecast is somewhat higher than 22k, but sadly not enough to clear 2006.

I certainly hope it does not reflect reality and as we both realize, there is sufficient uncertainty for quite a wide error margin. Obviously for my forecast that involves relatively less chance of lower SOFAD and more chance of higher SOFAD.

Even if we're starting to suspect that EB2 won't provide as many visas as we had hoped, EB1 still has the potential to supply far more than I am forecasting. If you are correct, then it would be enough to move nicely into 2007. So, even though I am the forum's resident pessimist, I don't think all is totally lost.

I do wish we could get some corroborative evidence about the state of EB1.

[TeddyKoochu]

Yes. For sure it will be terrible for lot of EB2IC folks. The whole push behind clearing PERM and 140 to pave way for ROW itself is so unfair and suspicious. As I said ... people need to really think about their careers and life plans rather than hang their hat on when exactly the GC will arrive.

Someday it will arrrive for sure. But just hang in their and do something you really love. Dont let your dreams become hostage to GC. I personally have done that and regret that I kept waiting on GC to pursue some of the things that I really wanted to do long time back.

Q Thanks for your nice words they are indeed very true. If we remain standing we will win. I think the big hurdles ahead of most of us will to stay in Job and have our extensions processed, h1 extensions are becoming hard to get and people are having hard times at consulates. Even H4 cases are being thrown for Admin processing just to give the gravity of the situation.


Teddy,

If it's any consolation, my latest forecast is somewhat higher than 22k, but sadly not enough to clear 2006.

I certainly hope it does not reflect reality and as we both realize, there is sufficient uncertainty for quite a wide error margin. Obviously for my forecast that involves relatively less chance of lower SOFAD and more chance of higher SOFAD.

Even if we're starting to suspect that EB2 won't provide as many visas as we had hoped, EB1 still has the potential to supply far more than I am forecasting. If you are correct, then it would be enough to move nicely into 2007. So, even though I am the forum's resident pessimist, I don't think all is totally lost.

I do wish we could get some corroborative evidence about the state of EB1.

Spec, your predictions are very well calculated and nicely articulated. I think you are doing a great job. You definitely are not the "resident pessimist" but a "realist". Your calculations look great and consistent in their own right. Maybe the truth lies somewhere between as you say between mine and your predictions. Let’s keep checking various sources and hope for the very best.

[TeddyKoochu]

http://dashboard.uscis.gov/

It is now updated for Nov.

http://dashboard.uscis.gov/index.cfm?formtype=7&office=1&charttype=1

Referring to the dashboard for I140 there does seem to be a really huge rise in the numbers
from feb to Nov. If we assume that 1/4th of them are EB2 ROW by assuming 50% as ROW and the ROW EB2-EB3 as 50-50
the the number of ROW I140's is 42/4~ 10.5K. Multiplying with the dependant factor this comes to ~ 23K.

Now lets assume that the approvals from Oct to Nov 2010 kind off cancel out the denials that
we would expect in the Nov 2010 figure. The total extrapolated consumption for EB2 ROW at 23K
is capable of giving 40-5.6-23 ~ 10K SOFAD. This might probably be the same as last year, me and spec use this value as the ROW SOFAD last year.

[qesehmk]

Teddy

Why are you only using Feb-Nov. Shouldn't we extrapolate full year.

Secondly are you using 140 approvals or pending numbers? I assume approvals - thats what we need to use. Now spike is something that is risk on top of the significant approvals. Right? If USCIS starts working on the spike/backlog of these 140 then they can easily find enough cases to fully utilize ROWEB2. Again sorry for my cynicism .... but after last year's PERM surge I think anything is possible.


http://dashboard.uscis.gov/index.cfm?formtype=7&office=1&charttype=1

Referring to the dashboard for I140 there does seem to be a really huge rise in the numbers
from feb to Nov. If we assume that 1/4th of them are EB2 ROW by assuming 50% as ROW and the ROW EB2-EB3 as 50-50
the the number of ROW I140's is 42/4~ 10.5K. Multiplying with the dependant factor this comes to ~ 23K.

Now lets assume that the approvals from Oct to Nov 2010 kind off cancel out the denials that
we would expect in the Nov 2010 figure. The total extrapolated consumption for EB2 ROW at 23K
is capable of giving 40-5.6-23 ~ 10K SOFAD. This might probably be the same as last year, me and spec use this value as the ROW SOFAD last year.

[Spectator]

Teddy

Why are you only using Feb-Nov. Shouldn't we extrapolate full year.

Secondly are you using 140 approvals or pending numbers? I assume approvals - thats what we need to use. Now spike is something that is risk on top of the significant approvals. Right? If USCIS starts working on the spike/backlog of these 140 then they can easily find enough cases to fully utilize ROWEB2. Again sorry for my cynicism .... but after last year's PERM surge I think anything is possible.I think this is something I tried to talk about before as a confirmation of the PERM trend.

The way I look at it, if I wanted to do a calculation, I might:

Current rate in FY2011 of Receipts would be nearly 92k I-140 Receipts for the whole of FY2011. Or you can extrapolate back a bit to determine the average to use.
Then you need to factor in a denial rate.
That gives you all approvals from the Receipts
Then say deduct 19k for EB1 I-140 (19k = 40k I-485 so perhaps a bit lower)
That gives you the number of EB2 & EB3 approvals.
Then apply split between EB2 & EB3 (50:50, 40:60 whatever you think).
Multiply EB2 I-140 by 2.1 to arrive at I-485.
Then determine how many I-485 might not be approved in FY2011 (1/3 perhaps)
What's left is I-485 potential approvals (but for retrogression) in FY2011 from FY2011 for EB2.
Around 40% of that is ROW.

You could simplify it by excluding the not approved part and simply say that it is the total for FY2011. Then you probably need to allow for approvals based on PERMs from FY2009 coming out of audit after 2 years.

Or something like that anyway.

It gives rather a high figure.

The same sort of calculation based on completions seems to work better (read - gives more acceptable figures!) and you don't have to factor in a denial rate, assuming completion = approval (may not be true).

Hope that makes sense. Probably not.

[gcseeker]

You guys are simply amazing and your work is extremely commendable .In this black box world of predicting GC dates where USCIS is of no help at all , reading this forum is a breath of fresh air.

Anywaz having read through the thread and noticed the high rate of PERM approvals pointed out by many in 2010 and also steady porting (4k/6k) numbers being reported seems like this will hit the I-485 queue sometime late 2011 and I simply cannot bring myself to be optimistic for the guys with PD's post May 2007. If the current rate of PERM approvals continues (which it might since EB3 to EB2 porting will pick up further steam and USCIS is granting approvals like crazy....) ..at some point of time would the numbers not retrogress again leaving post May 2007 stranded for couple of years.

Solidly depressed thinking about that scenario ( my PD is Nov 2007) . Also just on the legislation front due to the house being owned by the republicans and senate by the democrats see no way for Comprehensive immigration reform to pass this year and next year 2012 is an election year and no politician will take a chance on this bill. Also the recent bill introduced by Darell Issa ( Advanced degree visa bill -Jan 16 2011) also seems like will not do much.

I hope am wrong on the retrogression part (am not even expecting post May 2007 PD's to get current in 2012 at this rate ...)

[TeddyKoochu]

Teddy

Why are you only using Feb-Nov. Shouldn't we extrapolate full year.

Secondly are you using 140 approvals or pending numbers? I assume approvals - thats what we need to use. Now spike is something that is risk on top of the significant approvals. Right? If USCIS starts working on the spike/backlog of these 140 then they can easily find enough cases to fully utilize ROWEB2. Again sorry for my cynicism .... but after last year's PERM surge I think anything is possible.

Q apologies for the lack of details, let me provide some more details on how I arrived at 42K (Eb2 + Eb3) I did not use Feb to Nov however I just wanted to indicate the trend. A quick maybe dirty way of getting the figure is the processing times for I140 & 485 are 6 months each. Traditionally Jul - Sep is really spillover season so it will be mostly EB2 I/C. So realistically most of the ROW demand must be determined latest by Jun 2011 which is essentially just 6 months away. If we add all applications in the NOV column in various states
28176 1510 5386 7839 Nov10 it gives 42K.
A more sophisticated way is given below.
(5497 (Oct App) + 5386 (Nov App)) * 80/100 (Approvals - Denial) * 6(Extrapolate for the Yr) * (80/100) - EB1 Exclusion ~ 42K. – Intentionally using Oct and Nov so that we feel the force of the perm acceleration.
Then for a simplistic calculation I assumed that 1/4th of this is . This roughly gives 10K SOFAD from EB2 ROW. By using this Nov approach Iam assuming that even though the throughput of applications may increase but they will not approve that drastic a number every month it will stay in 6k odd range while the wait time will keep increasing. ROW folks are less likely to use premium processing. The Nov only approach has no actor for Eb1 so it becomes more conservative
I accept that all the perm calculations look great and they give us a bleak and grim picture but the I140 is a step closer. To make any kind of direct inference from the dashboard like averaging may not help as we specifically know that there is a peak in the later months. Hence I would refrain from using a monthly approval average.

[qesehmk]

Teddy

A couple of suggestions:

1) Are you taking 20% reduction (for denials) twice? Check your post.
2) Are you applying 2.2 factor on 140 (because 140 is only meant for primary applicant).

So if I make these two modifications then here is how 140 translate to 485 demand/approval.

11K for oct nov -> 66K for full year -> 145K 485 -> 105 ex EB1 485s -> 25K ROW EB2 (50% of 50%) -> 10-12K SOFAD.

This assumes that there are no denials or withdrawals. and I always prefer that way so that our estimates are conservative!!

Thanks for this approach. Guys .... come and poke holes in this now so we can improve !!

Q apologies for the lack of details, let me provide some more details on how I arrived at 42K (Eb2 + Eb3) I did not use Feb to Nov however I just wanted to indicate the trend. A quick maybe dirty way of getting the figure is the processing times for I140 & 485 are 6 months each. Traditionally Jul - Sep is really spillover season so it will be mostly EB2 I/C. So realistically most of the ROW demand must be determined latest by Jun 2011 which is essentially just 6 months away. If we add all applications in the NOV column in various states
28176 1510 5386 7839 Nov10 it gives 42K.
A more sophisticated way is given below.
(5497 (Oct App) + 5386 (Nov App)) * 80/100 (Approvals - Denial) * 6(Extrapolate for the Yr) * (80/100) - EB1 Exclusion ~ 42K. – Intentionally using Oct and Nov so that we feel the force of the perm acceleration.
Then for a simplistic calculation I assumed that 1/4th of this is . This roughly gives 10K SOFAD from EB2 ROW. By using this Nov approach Iam assuming that even though the throughput of applications may increase but they will not approve that drastic a number every month it will stay in 6k odd range while the wait time will keep increasing. ROW folks are less likely to use premium processing. The Nov only approach has no actor for Eb1 so it becomes more conservative
I accept that all the perm calculations look great and they give us a bleak and grim picture but the I140 is a step closer. To make any kind of direct inference from the dashboard like averaging may not help as we specifically know that there is a peak in the later months. Hence I would refrain from using a monthly approval average.

[Spectator]

Teddy

A couple of suggestions:

1) Are you taking 20% reduction (for denials) twice? Check your post.
2) Are you applying 2.2 factor on 140 (because 140 is only meant for primary applicant).

So if I make these two modifications then here is how 140 translate to 485 demand/approval.

11K for oct nov -> 66K for full year -> 145K 485 -> 105 ex EB1 485s -> 25K ROW EB2 (50% of 50%) -> 10-12K SOFAD.

This assumes that there are no denials or withdrawals. and I always prefer that way so that our estimates are conservative!!

Thanks for this approach. Guys .... come and poke holes in this now so we can improve !!Q,

Nicely laid out and I agree with the calculation except that if your ending figure were 25k and there are 40k visas available in EB2, that is 15k SOFAD for IC isn't it? Perhaps you are becoming conservative in your old age. LOL.

I calculated it out at just over 26k, so that gives nearly 14k SOFAD, which is about 8.5k Spill Across.

As a personal choice I thought about 2 slight amendments, but they cancel each other out, so we can probably stick with the simpler 50% of 50% anyway.

a) ROW including M & P was 53% in the FY2010 PERM figures.

b) I have previously calculated the ratio for EB2 as 2.1 apps per I-140 from the published data.

The progression then becomes:

11K for oct nov -> 66K for full year -> 139K 485 -> 99 ex EB1 485s -> 52K ROW (53%) -> 26k EB2 ROW (50%) -> 14k SOFAD -> 8.5k Spill Across.

[qesehmk]

Spec

Beside the fact that I am old ;) I also left some room for MP !!

That may explain it.... Thanks for your additions. Agree.


Q,

Nicely laid out and I agree with the calculation except that if your ending figure were 25k and there are 40k visas available in EB2, that is 15k SOFAD for IC isn't it? Perhaps you are becoming conservative in your old age. LOL.

I calculated it out at just over 26k, so that gives nearly 14k SOFAD, which is about 8.5k Spill Across.

As a personal choice I thought about 2 slight amendments, but they cancel each other out, so we can probably stick with the simpler 50% of 50% anyway.

a) ROW including M & P was 53% in the FY2010 PERM figures.

b) I have previously calculated the ratio for EB2 as 2.1 apps per I-140 from the published data.

The progression then becomes:

11K for oct nov -> 66K for full year -> 139K 485 -> 99 ex EB1 485s -> 52K ROW (53%) -> 26k EB2 ROW (50%) -> 14k SOFAD -> 8.5k Spill Across.

[vedu]

I think the idea of extrapolating first 2-3 months of I-140 receipts to the whole year has some problems. The sudden increase in number of receipts may be because of the accelerated PERM process in 2010. But now that the PERM process has run out of its steam and its almost current now, number of I-140 receipts will also decrease from Jan onwards. Any thoughts?

[TeddyKoochu]

Teddy

A couple of suggestions:

1) Are you taking 20% reduction (for denials) twice? Check your post.
2) Are you applying 2.2 factor on 140 (because 140 is only meant for primary applicant).

So if I make these two modifications then here is how 140 translate to 485 demand/approval.

11K for oct nov -> 66K for full year -> 145K 485 -> 105 ex EB1 485s -> 25K ROW EB2 (50% of 50%) -> 10-12K SOFAD.

This assumes that there are no denials or withdrawals. and I always prefer that way so that our estimates are conservative!!

Thanks for this approach. Guys .... come and poke holes in this now so we can improve !!

Following is the calculation.

(5497 (Oct App) + 5386 (Nov App)) * 80/100 (Approvals - Denial) * 6(Extrapolate for the Yr) * (80/100) - EB1 Exclusion ~ 42K.


1) Are you taking 20% reduction (for denials) twice? Check your post.
The factor of 80/100 has been used twice one to factor 20% as denials and once to exclude EB1.
2) Are you applying 2.2 factor on 140 (because 140 is only meant for primary applicant).
yes this is also being done, actually this part was in the previous post.
Starting with 42K, 1/4th of this is EB2 ROW this leaves us with 10.5K.The total extrapolated consumption for EB2 ROW at 23K is capable of giving 40-5.6-23 ~ 10K SOFAD.

[Spectator]

Following is the calculation.

(5497 (Oct App) + 5386 (Nov App)) * 80/100 (Approvals - Denial) * 6(Extrapolate for the Yr) * (80/100) - EB1 Exclusion ~ 42K.


1) Are you taking 20% reduction (for denials) twice? Check your post.
The factor of 80/100 has been used twice one to factor 20% as denials and once to exclude EB1.
2) Are you applying 2.2 factor on 140 (because 140 is only meant for primary applicant).
yes this is also being done, actually this part was in the previous post.
Starting with 42K, 1/4th of this is EB2 ROW this leaves us with 10.5K.The total extrapolated consumption for EB2 ROW at 23K is capable of giving 40-5.6-23 ~ 10K SOFAD.Teddy,

Some thoughts to ponder on.

As I understand your formula, a reduction of 20% at that point only reduces the I-140 count by c. 11.8k (58.9k * 20%). Using 2.2 as the multiplication factor for I-485 gives 26k EB1 I-485s, so you appear to be giving 14k Fall Down from EB1 within the formula. Since EB1 approvals represents a fixed number, I don't think you can use a % for it.

I see that you are applying a factor of 20% denials across the board. Perhaps we should factor in a denial rate. I am not sure that 20% is correct and certainly not for ROW.

That is 1 in 5 applications. The denial rate is probably quite different for EB2 versus EB3 and for ROW versus India. Large numbers of Countries within ROW don't have the same problems with 3 year degree issues for example and EB3 shouldn't have much problem at all.

If a denial rate is factored in, it think it might be better applied at a point where I-140 numbers for EB2-ROW have been calculated. It would then be a specific rate for EB2-ROW. Even 5% represents 1 in 20 cases which is still an awfully large number.

PS I can see a potential flaw with the exact approach I outlined above (which I think can be rectified) - let's see if you can!

[bieber]

EB2 ROW is giving 8-10K
EB1 is giving 12-14K
EB5 gives 6-7.5K
I+C quota is 6K

so the range is 32-37.5K, inventory is 34.5K, so where is the grim outlook? pls tell me dates move in to 2008 in jul-sep2012, i will be nomal :)

[qesehmk]

Your first two assumptions is what is being discussed. The other two seem fine.


EB2 ROW is giving 8-10K
EB1 is giving 12-14K
EB5 gives 6-7.5K
I+C quota is 6K

so the range is 32-37.5K, inventory is 34.5K, so where is the grim outlook? pls tell me dates move in to 2008 in jul-sep2012, i will be nomal :)

[TeddyKoochu]

Teddy,

Some thoughts to ponder on.

As I understand your formula, a reduction of 20% at that point only reduces the I-140 count by c. 11.8k (58.9k * 20%). Using 2.2 as the multiplication factor for I-485 gives 26k EB1 I-485s, so you appear to be giving 14k Fall Down from EB1 within the formula. Since EB1 approvals represents a fixed number, I don't think you can use a % for it.

I see that you are applying a factor of 20% denials across the board. Perhaps we should factor in a denial rate. I am not sure that 20% is correct and certainly not for ROW.

That is 1 in 5 applications. The denial rate is probably quite different for EB2 versus EB3 and for ROW versus India. Large numbers of Countries within ROW don't have the same problems with 3 year degree issues for example and EB3 shouldn't have much problem at all.

If a denial rate is factored in, it think it might be better applied at a point where I-140 numbers for EB2-ROW have been calculated. It would then be a specific rate for EB2-ROW. Even 5% represents 1 in 20 cases which is still an awfully large number.

PS I can see a potential flaw with the exact approach I outlined above (which I think can be rectified) - let's see if you can!

Spec the calculation that I gave is pretty much an approximation. I have assumed that EB1 would account for 20% of the I140's that’s an assumption. Now the denial factor is applied to the remaining number which is supposed to Eb2 and Eb3. The main reason for i140 denials is the "Ability to Pay" this is the reason why RFE's or denials are being issued on I140's, yes its more likely if its EB2. I agree that applying a 20% denial on top of the total EB2 and Eb3 is also an oversimplification but then we have to guess the individual rates. I do agree that applying the rates at an individual level will for sure increase the numbers. Iam applying the 485 factor later converting the 10.5K I140's to 23K I485's. However one thing I can certainly see that the perm acceleration has still not hit the dashboard. I will try to work and refine the calculations.

[Spectator]

Teddy, Q,

One of the things I like about Q's calculation is the sheer simplicity of it. I think that is a virtue.

Denials aside, there is also another factor.

There is a major disconnect between the number of I-140 Receipts and the number of I-140 Completions.

Cases not Completed represent over 25% of the Receipts each month, whether you look at FY2011 only or the last six months.

This has allowed the Pending numbers to climb from as low as 11k in Feb 2010 to 28k now. If it continues at the current rate it will exceed 40k by the end of the FY.

These Pending cases have the potential to add significantly to the overall approvals if they are dealt with, or even if the numbers are stabilized and Receipts remain steady.

So rather than trying to deal with more assumptions one way for Denials and the other way for Pending cases, perhaps it is easier to assume they will cancel each other out.

This leaves us with a very simple calculation that probably represents the mid point of what can happen and minimizes the number of assumptions that have to be made.

What do you think?

[kd2008]

Its the large number of pending I-140s and the high PERM approval rate in the last 4 months of FY 2010 that makes me extremely pessimistic about fall across in EB2 come June 2011.

[qesehmk]

Teddy

What;s the soure of 20% denial assumption? I thought you are looking at trackitt data.

Spec - I wouldn't imagine teddy looking the diff between receipts and approvals and calling it denials. Teddy correct me if I am wrong.

Overall i do think that a) 140 is a good pointer b) we need to monitor it in cumulative manner (since the pending 140s could accelerate).

In terms of EB2IC prospects in 2011 ... I reiterate - lets not be overly optimistic or pessimistic - because the reality is going to be somewher in the middle.

EB3 is a different story altogether. I have repeated it many times that there is no light at the end of that tunnel if you are EB3I w PD later than 2005. Unless some miralce happens/some law changes/some relief comes in, you are going to spend all your youth chasing green card.

Here is an interesting story somebody told me - if it is of any help.

During Vietnam war, a vietnamese girl was walking by a stream where she saw an American soldier sitting dejected. Curious, she asked what happened. He said, "My officer has asked me to build a bridge on this stream in 24 hours so that our platoon can cross this stream tomorrow. There is no way I can do it on my own in 24 hours. I can't find a solution. Its impossible to find a solution to this problem." Upon which the girl said, "If there is no solution, then there is no problem. Don't worry about it." And she moved on.

I think its important to realize what we can do about certain things and what we can not. Some problems have no solution and there is no point burning our energy on them. Whether EB3 or predicting whether USCIS will clear enough 140 to fully utilize ROW-EB2!! Seriously ... take it easy. We will know over time.

Anyway ... my 2 cents ... like always!


Teddy, Q,

One of the things I like about Q's calculation is the sheer simplicity of it. I think that is a virtue.

Denials aside, there is also another factor.

There is a major disconnect between the number of I-140 Receipts and the number of I-140 Completions.

Cases not Completed represent over 25% of the Receipts each month, whether you look at FY2011 only or the last six months.

This has allowed the Pending numbers to climb from as low as 11k in Feb 2010 to 28k now. If it continues at the current rate it will exceed 40k by the end of the FY.

These Pending cases have the potential to add significantly to the overall approvals if they are dealt with, or even if the numbers are stabilized and Receipts remain steady.

So rather than trying to deal with more assumptions one way for Denials and the other way for Pending cases, perhaps it is easier to assume they will cancel each other out.

This leaves us with a very simple calculation that probably represents the mid point of what can happen and minimizes the number of assumptions that have to be made.

What do you think?

[Spectator]

Spec - I wouldn't imagine teddy looking the diff between receipts and approvals and calling it denials. Q,

Nor me and I wasn't implying that. A denial is also a completion - probably. I assume USCIS use the term completion, rather than approval for a reason.

You can't do a valid calculation on each month's figures because of the processing time, but the most obvious reason for a non completion, to me at least, is that the application is being audited.

That should be set off by audited cases from 2 years ago being completed, so the Completion figures look a little low compared to Receipts

I could be sheer inefficiency or perhaps USCIS are taking more time examining even normal applications before making a decision and simply don't have the capacity to adjudicate more in a month.

Either way, that increased backlog will eventually hurt SOFAD - if not this year, then in a future one. It can't be allowed to build indefinitely, although there must be at least a baseline of the audit, appeal and cases pending within the normal processing times.

Since the backlog was reduced to 11k and audit processing times didn't improve, one could speculate that is the normal baseline, or close to it.

On a different, but related subject, there is still the question of PERM backlogs.

OFLC said last year's efforts represented a reduction of 50% of the backlog and that they would continue their efforts to reduce it. What is the rest composed of and what is the time scale to eliminate that?

[kera.sam]

Forgive me if my post sends any wrong signals. I got the link from Trackitt.

http://www.usimmlaw.com/EB2_India_How_Long.htm

Thanks to everyone who is pitching their logical ideas to help give a realistic picture to people like me who have very less acumen on the matters of immigration

[qesehmk]

Spec ... my comments in line...

Q,

A denial is also a completion - probably. I assume USCIS use the term completion, rather than approval for a reason.

I do not know.
...

I could be sheer inefficiency or perhaps USCIS are taking more time examining even normal applications before making a decision and simply don't have the capacity to adjudicate more in a month.
Another thing to consider is that there is policy associated with immigration. So what kind of immigration, when and how much is all that matters. Its not a coincidence that they released years of backlog of GC cases in 2003-04 when economy started booming. Think about it.


Either way, that increased backlog will eventually hurt SOFAD.
True.

....

OFLC said last year's efforts represented a reduction of 50% of the backlog and that they would continue their efforts to reduce it. What is the rest composed of and what is the time scale to eliminate that?
Again... don't know. But as I said backlog reduction is at least part driven by immigration policy.

[qesehmk]

Thanks Kera. Welcome. I think if EB2I solely becomes dependent on its own 7% allocation then EB2I becomes just like EB3. Fortunately that's not the case and so the article you posted is far from truth.


Forgive me if my post sends any wrong signals. I got the link from Trackitt.

http://www.usimmlaw.com/EB2_India_How_Long.htm

Thanks to everyone who is pitching their logical ideas to help give a realistic picture to people like me who have very less acumen on the matters of immigration

[Spectator]

The Visa Statistics for FY2010 have just been posted.

Spillover of 20,434 comprised of the following:

EB1 - 2,062
EB2-M - 2,199
EB2-P - 854
EB2-ROW - 6,507
EB2 Total - 9,560
EB5 - 8,812

Total Approvals

EB1 - 41,026
EB2 - 53,872
EB3 - 42,431 (of which 4,762 were Other Workers)
EB4 - 11,048
EB5 - 1,885
Total - 150,262

EB1 Approvals

China - 6,741 - 16.4%
India - 6,741 - 16.4%
Mexico - 1,835 - 4.5%
Philippines - 407 - 1%
ROW - 25,302 - 61.7%

EB2 Approvals

China - 6,505 - 12.1%
India - 19,961 - 37.1%
Mexico - 817 - 1.5%
Philippines - 2,162 - 4.0%
ROW - 24,427 - 45.3%

IC SOFAD - 26,466
IC Spillover - 20,434
Spillover received by China - 3,489 - 17.1%
Spillover received by India - 16,945 - 82.9%

EB3 Approvals

China - 3,676 - 8.7%
India - 3,036- 7.2%
Mexico - 7,740 - 18.2%
Philippines - 3,651 - 8.6%
ROW - 24,328 - 57.3%

Mexico & Philippines number above 7% - 5,359

[kd2008]

The Visa Statistics for FY2010 have just been posted.

Back with some figures later.



http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/statistics/statistics_5240.html

[qesehmk]

http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/statistics/statistics_5240.html

Thanks KD & SPEC.



The Visa Statistics for FY2010 have just been posted.

Back with some figures later.

EB1 - 41,026
EB2 - 53,872
EB3 - 42,431 (of which 4,762 were Other Workers)
EB4 - 11,048
EB5 - 1,139

Total - 149,516
Some quick comments. EB5 is a wonderful number. EB1 didn;t contribute almost nothing (simply passed on EB5 SOFAD to EB2). EB2-ROW it seems actually contributed almost all remaining SOFAD.

Here is EB2 analysis -
EB2 I - ~ 20K
EB2 C - ~6K
---------------
Total SOFAD = 26K (which implies 3.5K annual EB3->2 conversions!! PROPS to ourselves ..)

Contribution by EB5 9K
Contribution by EB2-ROW 11K (Props to Teddy!! Good job!)
Total Consumption by ROW (including MP) - 16K
Since 6K was backlong from 2009, it means ROW had a 10K of new demand taken care in 2010 which is way lower than what we thought.

Stay tuned. We need to digest this and then use this to predict 2010-11. But in brief, if ROW follows same pattern in 2011 then EB2I can go places. However, if the PERM surge hits 140 and eventually 485 for ROW then EB2I will be affected. Which direction it will go .... not sure now. Lets discuss..

[bieber]

http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/statistics/statistics_5240.html

u guys are fast,

[TeddyKoochu]

Contribution by EB2-ROW 11K (Props to Teddy!! Good job!)


Thanks Q, also to my good friend Spectator he was with me always on this :)

Teddy

What;s the soure of 20% denial assumption? I thought you are looking at trackitt data.

Spec - I wouldn't imagine teddy looking the diff between receipts and approvals and calling it denials. Teddy correct me if I am wrong.



Q if we look at the data you would notice that roughly 1/3rd to 1/5th of the applications in terms of receipts are awaiting customer action, the typical timeline to answer an RFE is just a month so every month these will be different applications. The real fact is that RFE's are being issued left right and center, mostly the RFE is on Ability to pay and its hard for consulting or even small companies to survive these. They started to advise people to apply in EB3 since for this the offered salary would be less and RFE would be less likely. In believe that 50% RFE's are going to be deadly especially if it is EB2. So assuming a 20% denial rate IMHO seems to be fair and completions definitely includes denials. Traditionally also it’s the I140 that is more likely to de denied for various reasons that the labor. Unfortunately people don't post denials on Trackitt they would just leave the case as pending and maybe file again.

[kd2008]

Thanks KD & SPEC.



Some quick comments. EB5 is a wonderful number. EB1 didn;t contribute almost nothing (simply passed on EB5 SOFAD to EB2). EB2-ROW it seems actually contributed almost all remaining SOFAD.

Here is EB2 analysis -
EB2 I - ~ 20K
EB2 C - ~6K
---------------
Total SOFAD = 26K (which implies 3.5K annual EB3->2 conversions!! PROPS to ourselves ..)

Contribution by EB5 9K
Contribution by EB2-ROW 11K (Props to Teddy!! Good job!)
Total Consumption by ROW (including MP) - 16K
Since 6K was backlong from 2009, it means ROW had a 10K of new demand taken care in 2010 which is way lower than what we thought.

Stay tuned. We need to digest this and then use this to predict 2010-11. But in brief, if ROW follows same pattern in 2011 then EB2I can go places. However, if the PERM surge hits 140 and eventually 485 for ROW then EB2I will be affected. Which direction it will go .... not sure now. Lets discuss..

In FY 2010, ROW PERM were ~36K. Say, Eb2 were 50%, then 18K, multiply by 2.25 for I-485s, we get 40.5, of these 10K were used. So ~30.5K remaining + the new demand from FY 2011. It looks an unlikely scenario for fall across for EB2 this year. May be I am way off here. I hope so.

[Spectator]

See my post #482.

I have now posted most of the interesting statistics.

I have calculated them quite quickly and will double check them.

My first download had screwed up EB5 and Grand Total pages.

The figure for EB5 was 1,885 as expected. The Grand Total was 150,262.

I have updated the figures in post #482

[Spectator]

I think pretty much exactly the same, which is comforting.

Relying on Trackitt data gave EB2-ROW (not including Mexico & Philippines) 24.6k. That meant ROW contributed 6.4k. Mexico & Philippines have traditionally contributed around 3k from their 6k allocation.

From the document I saw, EB5 only had 1.9k approvals, so contributed 8.8k.

China and India contributed their own combined figure of 6k.

That gives SOFAD so far of 6.4 + 3.0 + 8.8 + 6.0 = 24.2k (it was actually 6.5 + 3.1 + 8.8 + 6.0 = 24.4k, leaving EB1 as 2.1k)

By process of elimination EB1 would have contributed 2.3k to make up the 26.5k total SOFAD. That implies EB1 approvals were 40.8k in FY2010.I posted this a week ago.

Am I allowed to say I am feeling quite pleased with myself!

The unknown factor was M & P contribution in EB2 - so a pretty good guess.

[qesehmk]

Spec

You have earned your stripes !! Great job!!


I posted this a week ago.

Am I allowed to say I am feeling quite pleased with myself!

The unknown factor was M & P contribution in EB2 - so a pretty good guess.

[Spectator]

Spec

You have earned your stripes !! Great job!!I was lucky in that Trackitt almost exactly predicted the EB2-ROW (excluding M & P) with the ratio I was using.

[veni001]

In FY 2010, ROW PERM were ~36K. Say, Eb2 were 50%, then 18K, multiply by 2.25 for I-485s, we get 40.5, of these 10K were used. So ~30.5K remaining + the new demand from FY 2011. It looks an unlikely scenario for fall across for EB2 this year. May be I am way off here. I hope so.

Something to consider...
EB2 may not be 50% of all ROW PERMs:)
About 7.5k EB2 application are pending at USCIS as of 10-01-2010 out of which 6.5k have PD from FY 2010:rolleyes:

[leo07]

May be DOS used your calculations from last week and came up with the numbers? :)

Jokes apart, now that your 2010 analysis came true, I'm really worried about 2011. Your 2011 predictions are very very conservative, I thought. not anymore :(

Cheers!

[veni001]

The Visa Statistics for FY2010 have just been posted.
......................
....................
EB3 Approvals

China - 3,676 - 8.7%
India - 3,036- 7.2%
Mexico - 7,740 - 18.2%
Philippines - 3,651 - 8.6%
ROW - 24,328 - 57.3%

Mexico & Philippines number above 7% - 5,359

China EB3 quota is only 2,503 per year and USCIS gave out 3,676? Great!:confused:

[Spectator]

China EB3 quota is only 2,503 per year and USCIS gave out 3,676? Great!:confused:Actually the quota was 3,016-300 = 2,716 but I know what you are saying.

I think we should be more charitable than that. EB3-C lost a large number of visa in FY2008 and FY2009, so this kind of evens it out. EB3-I loss of 500 visas in FY2009 was evened out by the extra 500 they received in FY2008. Things have away of evening out over the long run, even if it doesn't feel like it.

What about EB3-M with a notional 7% limit of 3,016 and actual visas approvals of 7,740? Or the Philippines with 3,651? It might be legal, but that sticks in the craw more with me. No offence intended to EB3-M or EB3-P people.

[angryclubs]

Q/Spec/Teddy,
Is there any change in your predictions for 2011 after looking at the visa statistics that were just posted? First time poster here. Been following you at IV and Trackitt for quite some time. I have to say, you guys are doing a wonderful job with the analysis. Gives us lemmings a ray of hope. Cheers!

[Spectator]

May be DOS used your calculations from last week and came up with the numbers? :)

Jokes apart, now that your 2010 analysis came true, I'm really worried about 2011. Your 2011 predictions are very very conservative, I thought. not anymore :(

Cheers!Thank you for the kind words but don't get too worried yet.

Whilst EB2-ROW doesn't look great at present, that can change.

EB1 is another whole ball game. It IS running very low at the moment according to Trackitt figures.

Whilst I don't believe the real numbers will be quite as low as this predicts, there is still some wiggle room there. Unfortunately, there is no other source of information.

The loss of the visa numbers from FB is going to hurt in FY2011. Remember, all things being equal, 26.5k SOFAD in FY2010 is only about 20k in FY2011. So anything above that is actually a better result.

[veni001]

Actually the quota was 3,016-300 = 2,716 but I know what you are saying.

I think we should be more charitable than that. EB3-C lost a large number of visa in FY2008 and FY2009, so this kind of evens it out. EB3-I loss of 500 visas in FY2009 was evened out by the extra 500 they received in FY2008. Things have away of evening out over the long run, even if it doesn't feel like it.

What about EB3-M with a notional 7% limit of 3,016 and actual visas approvals of 7,740? Or the Philippines with 3,651? It might be legal, but that sticks in the craw more with me. No offence intended to EB3-M or EB3-P people.

Thanks Spec,
Another observation is South Korea's consumption
EB1- 2,001
EB2- 4,793
May be we need to consider how many PERM's approved for south Korea in FY 2010 for 2011 projections...

[qesehmk]

Something to consider...
EB2 may not be 50% of all ROW PERMs:)
About 7.5k EB2 application are pending at USCIS as of 10-01-2010 out of which 6.5k have PD from FY 2010:rolleyes:
Good thought veni.



What about EB3-M with a notional 7% limit of 3,016 and actual visas approvals of 7,740? Or the Philippines with 3,651? It might be legal, but that sticks in the craw more with me. No offence intended to EB3-M or EB3-P people.
That may be because of FB+EB combined limit.


Q/Spec/Teddy,
Is there any change in your predictions for 2011 after looking at the visa statistics that were just posted? First time poster here. Been following you at IV and Trackitt for quite some time. I have to say, you guys are doing a wonderful job with the analysis. Gives us lemmings a ray of hope. Cheers!
welcome angryclubs. unforunately more than likely the predictions will become conservative ... mostly because of EB1. While corporate america is firing workers .. they are on a binge spree of hiring multinational managers and PHDs!! Besides the ROW situation doesn't give a whole lot comfort. EB5 is the new hope ... but as economy starts firing on all cylinders that too may change. Sorry to be pessimist here. But net net ... EB2I likely should move end of 06 or early 07 as early predicted

I have long been lazy of updating my models. I guess I have run out of all of my excuses. Will do over weekend.

[Spectator]

Some bonus statistics!

China used 12.32% of available visas in EB1-EB3.
India used 21.65% of available visas in EB1-EB3.

Overall China used 17,792 visas in all EB categories, which was 11.84% of all EB visas approved. China used 32,343 visas for EB & FB combined, which was 8.58% of immigration visas approved in EB & FB that were subject to numerical limits.

Overall, India used 30,624 visas in all EB categories, which was 20.38% of all EB visas approved. India used 46,646 visas for EB & FB combined, which was 12.38% of immigration visas approved in EB & FB that were subject to numerical limits.

[Spectator]

Thanks Spec,
Another observation is South Korea's consumption
EB1- 2,001
EB2- 4,793
May be we need to consider how many PERM's approved for south Korea in FY 2010 for 2011 projections...You have been studying hard haven't you! LOL.

..... and 3,356 in EB.

South Korea consumed 11,889 visas in EB categories, which is 7.9% of the total. This has happened for many years.

It can happen because of SK low usage of FB visas - this year it was 1,444. They only consumed 14,481 in total in EB and FB, against a 7% limit of 26,366 set for FY2010.

It is a source of irritation to ROW applicants.

To answer your question, they are already part of the ROW PERM figures, so they already form part of the projections. If they take more visas, it is from other ROW in EB3, much as Mexico and Philippines do.

In EB2, they took roughly the same amount in FY2009 and the same is the case for EB1.

If the numbers had jumped considerably, I agree it could have been a source of concern for FY2011. Nonetheless, when I have some time, I will look to see if the South Korea PERM numbers look significantly different in FY2010.

[Spectator]

That may be because of FB+EB combined limit.
Q,

It is (well they don't exceed EB 7% limit, because FB for Mexico and Philippines is always fully allocated), which is why I said "it might be legal but ....".

It hurts not only EB3-ROW who lose 4k of their notional allocation, but it hurts EB3-I as well. It delays the time when EB3-ROW can become Current and provide Fall Across to EB3-I.

I suspect that EB3-I will get Fall Across from EB3-ROW before it ever sees any Fall Down from EB2-C & I, so it is important to them.

And double yay! I'm a Senior Member.

[qesehmk]

Q,
I suspect that EB3-I will get Fall Across from EB3-ROW before it ever sees any Fall Down from EB2-C & I, so it is important to them.

Absolutely.


Q,
And double yay! I'm a Senior Member.
Looks like 100 posts is the required milestone!! Congratulations!!!

[veni001]

You have been studying hard haven't you! LOL.

.....
.....

If the numbers had jumped considerably, I agree it could have been a source of concern for FY2011. Nonetheless, when I have some time, I will look to see if the South Korea PERM numbers look significantly different in FY2010.

Thanks Speck,
I was checking FY 2010 PERM data which shows 4,610 approved PERM for South Korea, may reflect to similar demand this year!

[veni001]

I am not sure if we can use 2010 PERM Data breakdown to correlate i140 data from USCIS dash board, only difference would be EB1 i140's

FY 2010
Total 81,412
Denied/Withdrawn11,175
Certified 70,237 Level1 Level2 Level3 Level4 Blank
INDIA 28,930 7,537 12,694 4,488 3,723 488
CHINA 4,052 1,444 1,603 589 312 104
MEX 3,306 1,197 849 678 509 73
PHIL 3,305 1,543 850 405 290 217
ROW 30,644 11,665 10,601 4,641 3,087 650
Total(each level) 23,386 26,597 10,801 7,921 1,532

[veni001]

I am not sure if we can use 2010 PERM Data breakdown to correlate i140 data from USCIS dash board, only difference would be EB1 i140's

FY 2010
Total 81,412
Denied/Withdrawn11,175
Certified 70,237 Level1 Level2 Level3 Level4 Blank
INDIA 28,930 7,537 12,694 4,488 3,723 488
CHINA 4,052 1,444 1,603 589 312 104
MEX 3,306 1,197 849 678 509 73
PHIL 3,305 1,543 850 405 290 217
ROW 30,644 11,665 10,601 4,641 3,087 650
Total(each level) 23,386 26,597 10,801 7,921 1,532

Another Observation from USCIS dash board

Between Oct -2009 and Nov- 2010
Total I140 Receipts - 92, 561
Completions - 84,629
Pending (as of Nov-10) - 28,176

Is it safe to assume all 41,026 EB1 approvals(FY 2010) are from the 74k I140 completions between Oct 09 -Sep 10 ? :confused:

[MorningSun]

Hello, Q, Teddy, Spectator and others. Thank you for the diligent analysis.

My priority date is 1/29/2007-EB2, what are the chances that my date will be current this year.

Thank you,
MorningSun.

[qesehmk]

MS, welcome to forum. Pls spend some time reading the thread. You will get your answers.


Hello, Q, Teddy, Spectator and others. Thank you for the diligent analysis.

My priority date is 1/29/2007-EB2, what are the chances that my date will be current this year.

Thank you,
MorningSun.

[Spectator]

Consular Processing Statistics FY2010

EB1
Country ---- Total --- -CP- --- % CP -- CP FY09
China ------- 6,741 ---- 75 -- 4.08% -- 3.50%
India ------- 6,741 --- 105 -- 1.56% -- 1.24%
Mexico ------ 1,835 ---- 44 -- 2.40% -- 3.48%
Philippines --- 407 ---- 30 -- 7.37% -- 5.92%
ROW -------- 25,302 - 1,517 -- 6.00% -- 4.73%

Total ------ 41,026 - 1,971 -- 4.80% -- 3.72%

EB2
Country ---- Total --- -CP- --- % CP -- CP FY09
China ------- 6,505 ---- 70 -- 1.08% -- 1.18%
India ------ 19,961 --- 102 -- 0.51% -- 0.74%
Mexico -------- 817 ---- 22 -- 2.69% -- 2.06%
Philippines - 2,162 --- 137 -- 6.34% -- 6.59%
ROW -------- 24,427 - 1,167 -- 4.78% -- 3.11%

Total ------ 53,872 - 1,498 -- 2.78% -- 2.76%

EB3
Country ---- Total --- -CP- --- % CP -- CP FY09
China ------- 3,676 - 2,064 - 56.15% -- 27.02%
India ------- 3,036 --- 503 - 16.57% -- 13.59%
Mexico ------ 7,740 --- 169 -- 2.18% --- 5.43%
Philippines - 3,651 --- 759 - 20.79% -- 33.82%
ROW -------- 24,328 - 2,846 - 11.70% -- 13.84%

Total ------ 42,431 - 6,341 - 14.94% -- 16.00%

Commentary

EB1

The % is fairly unchanged from FY2009.

EB2

The overall CP rate for EB2 has remained unchanged at around 3%.

However, when looking at the China/India group within EB2, the CP rate is only around 1%, also unchanged from FY2009.

EB3

This Category is always a reminder of why not to use an average % CP route.

Whilst the average CP for EB3 is nearly 15%, much the same as FY2009, there are wide variations by Country - from 2.18% for Mexico to a fairly astonishing 56.15% for China.

EB3 China is worth talking further about. The CP rate has leapt from 27.02% in FY2009 to 56.15%, more than doubling.

This is speculation, but it would fit the facts.

The VO, due to the Chinese EB3 Class Action Lawsuit, would have been acutely aware not to waste EB3-C visas again.

Figures are available up until August 2010 for Visa allocations and June 2010 for Visa returns. The difference represents Visas Used.

The Visa Office allocated 20.7% of the available visas for EB3-C in Q1 2010 but eventual returns of these visas at a later date were 53.7%.

Visa allocations to EB3-C were a little lower in Q2 and the VO had to be quite aggressive in Q3 to catch up, as the return rate was quite high.

To the end of Q3 2,487 visas had actually been used by EB3-C and the return rate was averaging 32.4%, although lowering slightly in each quarter.

For the final quarter, returns must have been very low (dropping to perhaps 10% for the quarter) or the VO allocated an awful lot of visas in September 2010.

I favour the former explanation because it makes more sense and because it would have been difficult for the Consulates to organize that many interviews and complete them within September.

This explains both why EB3-C exceeded their 7% limit by so far and why the Consular Processing % rose so much, since Visa returns are only a function of the Consular process.

Therefore, I believe that the figure of over 50% CP is more a statistical blip, rather than an ongoing trend. I would expect it to return to nearer 30% again in the future.

[angryclubs]

Hello, Q, Teddy, Spectator and others. Thank you for the diligent analysis.

My priority date is 1/29/2007-EB2, what are the chances that my date will be current this year.

Thank you,
MorningSun.

MS, As per initial calculations by Q, you would have had a almost 100% chance of becoming current between July-Sep 2011. However the newly published visa statistics pour cold water on the estimates and your chances of being current this year have fallen dramatically. I would think it stands at 50-50 for 2011 with a 100% shot in 2012.

Experts, please correct if you think I got it wrong.

[TeluguBidda]

MS, As per initial calculations by Q, you would have had a almost 100% chance of becoming current between July-Sep 2011. However the newly published visa statistics pour cold water on the estimates and your chances of being current this year have fallen dramatically. I would think it stands at 50-50 for 2011 with a 100% shot in 2012.

Experts, please correct if you think I got it wrong.

With the 6.5K spillover from FB visas non-existent for FY2011 + 4,000 porting cases + EB2 I-140 spike + greater # of EB-2 China in 2006, would be safe to assume that the total # of EB-2 India for 2011 would be around 10,000? This would be 50% of the 20,000 received in FY2010.

If the answer is Yes to above, EB-2 India should not cross Oct-2006, correct?

[qesehmk]

Friends... we created this dedicated website for our blog.

WELCOME HERE!! AND I LOOK FORWARD TO ENGAGE IN A MEANINGFUL DISCUSSION THAT WILL HELP ALL OF OUR VISITORS!!

[TexDBoy]

Thanks Q for all the effort. This blog is so informative and I hope/wish that you succeed in your mission for which you started this.

[admin]

Thanks TBoy :-)
Thanks Q for all the effort. This blog is so informative and I hope/wish that you succeed in your mission for which you started this.

[Spectator]

Q,

Congratulations on moving the forum so quickly.

Perhaps everyone who visits can do their bit to advertise the new location to people who might be interested.

[TeddyKoochu]

Friends... we created this dedicated website for our blog.

WELCOME HERE!! AND I LOOK FORWARD TO ENGAGE IN A MEANINGFUL DISCUSSION THAT WILL HELP ALL OF OUR VISITORS!!

Congratulations Q, great to see qesehmk.org. Time for some great predictions and calculations now.

[admin]

Spec/Teddy

Thanks! The last time I have done any coding was in 2002. But with this whole cloud stuff .... things are so incredibly easy that I got this domain this morning. The site was up in a couple of hours with some issues. Went out for lunch ... came back and then solved those issues and cleaned up old website. I am in love with this whole cloud and commoditization basic services.


Q,

Congratulations on moving the forum so quickly.

Perhaps everyone who visits can do their bit to advertise the new location to people who might be interested.

[qesehmk]

Veni Thanks.

Now lets get back to business. Will update the header with latest 485 inventory and everything that other gurus have been predicting by late evening tonight.


Great and Congratulations!!

[sha_kus]

Congrats on the new site Q.

The Annual Report is out at
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY10AnnualReport-TableV-PartII.pdf

And all staticstics at
http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/statistics/statistics_5240.html

Thanks
S

[veni001]

Veni Thanks.

Now lets get back to business. Will update the header with latest 485 inventory and everything that other gurus have been predicting by late evening tonight.

Thanks Q,
I was looking at I-140 trending from USCIS dash board, here is the summary

FY 2009
Total Receipts - Dec 08 -- Sept 09 - 46,714
Dec 08 -- Sept 09 - Total Completions - 132,611
Total Pending as of Sept 09 - 14,504
Awaiting Customer action as of Sept -09 - 2,634

FY 2010
Total Receipts - Oct 09 -- Sept 10 - 77,280
Oct 09 -- Sept 10 - Total Completions - 73,746
Total Pending as of Nov 10 - 28,176
Awaiting Customer action as of Nov -10 - 1,510

Even-though I-140 receipts for FY 2010 increased by 70% compared 2009 but, the Completions(approvals) are only half!

Even if we take the Net(Completions+Pending+Awaiting Action) for each FY

FY 2009 = 132,611+14,504+2,634 = 149,749 (Dec 08 --Sept 09)

FY 2010 = 73,746+28,176+1,510 = 103,432 (Oct 09 -- Nov 10)
================================================== ====
Difference = 46,317 This is Net Reduction
================================================== ===

How do you relate this for FY 2011 SOFAD?

[qesehmk]

73K 140 translates to 160K plus 485. Of which even if 80K is EB1 and EB2-ROW, tehn you won't find any SOFAD.

Secondly - Even though 140 approvals reduced from 2009-2010, its teh composition of those approvals that could've made teh difference.

The 2009 approvals may have consisted at least part of Jul 07 fiasco applications (which were all kinds of EB). Whereas 2010 approvals were probably EB1 and EB2-ROW.


Thanks Q,
I was looking at I-140 trending from USCIS dash board, here is the summary

FY 2009
Total Receipts - Dec 08 -- Sept 09 - 46,714
Dec 08 -- Sept 09 - Total Completions - 132,611
Total Pending as of Sept 09 - 14,504
Awaiting Customer action as of Sept -09 - 2,634

FY 2010
Total Receipts - Oct 09 -- Sept 10 - 77,280
Oct 09 -- Sept 10 - Total Completions - 73,746
Total Pending as of Nov 10 - 28,176
Awaiting Customer action as of Nov -10 - 1,510

Even-though I-140 receipts for FY 2010 increased by 70% compared 2009 but, the Completions(approvals) are only half!

Even if we take the Net(Completions+Pending+Awaiting Action) for each FY

FY 2009 = 132,611+14,504+2,634 = 149,749 (Dec 08 --Sept 09)

FY 2010 = 73,746+28,176+1,510 = 103,432 (Oct 09 -- Nov 10)
================================================== ====
Difference = 46,317 This is Net Reduction
================================================== ===

How do you relate this for FY 2011 SOFAD?

[veni001]

73K 140 translates to 160K plus 485. Of which even if 80K is EB1 and EB2-ROW, tehn you won't find any SOFAD.

Secondly - Even though 140 approvals reduced from 2009-2010, its the composition of those approvals that could've made teh difference.

The 2009 approvals may have consisted at least part of Jul 07 fiasco applications (which were all kinds of EB). Whereas 2010 approvals were probably EB1 and EB2-ROW.

Thanks Q,
Considering that case, Is it safe to assume all 41,026( or at-least 35k) EB1 approvals(FY 2010) are from the 74k I140 completions between Oct 09 -Sep 10?

Then we are only talking about 40K I140 for EB2-EB3. which equates to 84K i485. Assume 50% EB2, and we know that there are about 17.5K EB2 ROW (11K approved in FY2011 & 6.5K pending as of 10/10), this translates to less-than 15% of total i140 approvals are EB2 ROW?:confused:

[qesehmk]

Veni

Everything looks good to me. Except you need to make the same 2.2 assumption on your base exclusion of EB1 approvals. In other words you can only subtract 41K/2.2 from the 2010 I-140.

p.s. - Majority of EB1 approved in a year always come from the same year. Almost 90% plus.


Thanks Q,
Considering that case, Is it safe to assume all 41,026( or at-least 35k) EB1 approvals(FY 2010) are from the 74k I140 completions between Oct 09 -Sep 10?

Then we are only talking about 40K I140 for EB2-EB3. which equates to 84K i485. Assume 50% EB2, and we know that there are about 17.5K EB2 ROW (11K approved in FY2011 & 6.5K pending as of 10/10), this translates to less-than 15% of total i140 approvals are EB2 ROW?:confused:

[veni001]

Veni

Everything looks good to me. Except you need to make the same 2.2 assumption on your base exclusion of EB1 approvals. In other words you can only subtract 41K/2.2 from the 2010 I-140.

p.s. - Majority of EB1 approved in a year always come from the same year. Almost 90% plus.

Got it! Thanks Q,
That translates to my estimated EB2 ROW i485(incl. M&P) demand as 1k per month(plus pending)! for FY 2011.

[qesehmk]

So tha's about 18K in 2011.

Based on my discussions w Spec and Teddy the ROW-EB2 2011 demand would be somewhere near 24-28K. I know Teddy thinks its less than that. Wonder what these other gurus think about it.


Got it! Thanks Q,
That translates to my estimated EB2 ROW i485(incl. M&P) demand as 1k per month(plus pending)! for FY 2011.

[veni001]

So tha's about 18K in 2011.

Based on my discussions w Spec and Teddy the ROW-EB2 2011 demand would be somewhere near 24-28K. I know Teddy thinks its less than that. Wonder what these other gurus think about it.

Q,
That's right, again this assumes FY2010 PERM data(for EB2)and i140 data (EB1) as reference.
We saw increased i140 filings from March 2010(USCIS dash board) but any change in i140 filings starting Jan 2011 will have huge impact on SOFAD ( +ve or -ve).

In any case my gut feeling is EB2ROW( incl. M&P) shoul be less than 20k for FY 2011.

[bieber]

So tha's about 18K in 2011.

Based on my discussions w Spec and Teddy the ROW-EB2 2011 demand would be somewhere near 24-28K. I know Teddy thinks its less than that. Wonder what these other gurus think about it.

this includes mex and phi? taking the I+C quota out, 6-10k from EB2 across is possible?

so u r expecting fy2011 sofad slightly less than fy2010, 22-26k?

[qesehmk]

Bieber, I like you name :-)

I have a range from 15-35K but most likely it will be around 24-26K. There are others like Teddy who think more is possible. And then some like Spec who think it will be 20K.

I still haven't updated the header of the thread based on new 485 inventory and the 2010 data published.

However as I said always EB1 and EB2ROW are key to SOFAD. Based on EB5 contribution in 2010, one would be tempted to replace EB1 with EB5. Since EB1 continues to show strong demand and tends to utilize almost all its quota.


this includes mex and phi? taking the I+C quota out, 6-10k from EB2 across is possible?

so u r expecting fy2011 sofad slightly less than fy2010, 22-26k?

[Spectator]

Got it! Thanks Q,
That translates to my estimated EB2 ROW i485(incl. M&P) demand as 1k per month(plus pending)! for FY 2011.Hi veni.

I must admit you have lost me as to how you arrive at demand of 1k per month.

I think there are dangers to looking at the FY2009 data. Huge backlog reduction was under way and completions in some months were as high as 18-19k.

Another way to perhaps look at it is to say there were 74k I-140 completions in FY2010.

If 20k of these related to EB1, then 54k related to EB2/EB3.

If 50% of these were EB2 and 55% were Countries other than India and China that gives 14.85k EB2-ROW I-140s.

That would be 32.67k I-485 for EB2-ROW. We know that there were actually 27.4k approvals in FY2010 so that is a factor of 84%.

Currently, the average completions in FY2011 would give 65k for the year. Removing EB1 of 19k (because there are less visas) gives 46k. Using the 50% and 55% factors again gives 12.65k EB2 (non I or C) and 27.83k I-485. At 84% factor, that would be 23.38k I-485 approvals, which is 4k less than FY2010.

But, completions are running at a very low rate. If the current Receipt and Completions rates continued, the pending numbers would climb from 24k in September 2010 to just over 50k at the end of FY2011. Even just stabilizing the current Pending numbers would provide more than enough extra completions to match and exceed last year's figures.

I realize I have made some simplifications, but I think it still illustrates the point. Really, we don't have enough information on what is happening in FY2011, since USCIS have only published figures on I-140 for 2 months of the fiscal year.

[Spectator]

Bieber, I like you name :-)

I have a range from 15-35K but most likely it will be around 24-26K. There are others like Teddy who think more is possible. And then some like Spec who think it will be 20K.

I still haven't updated the header of the thread based on new 485 inventory and the 2010 data published.

However as I said always EB1 and EB2ROW are key to SOFAD. Based on EB5 contribution in 2010, one would be tempted to replace EB1 with EB5. Since EB1 continues to show strong demand and tends to utilize almost all its quota.Q,

I have a range as well, although it does shift as more data comes in. It currently is stands at 21-26k SOFAD.

I have allowed for an increase in EB5 approvals, which may not happen.

It assumes a conservative position on EB1 (35-40k). If in fact the current Trackitt figures reflect reality for the entire year, it would allow for an entirely different level of SOFAD.

[geevikram]

Q,

I have a range as well, although it does shift as more data comes in. It currently is stands at 21-26k SOFAD.

I have allowed for an increase in EB5 approvals, which may not happen.

It assumes a conservative position on EB1 (35-40k). If in fact the current Trackitt figures reflect reality for the entire year, it would allow for an entirely different level of SOFAD.

Spec,
What would be your SOFAD if trackitt were an accurate representation of EB1 consumption?

And thank you all for your awesome contribution.

-Vik

[bieber]

Q, thanks, inspired from teen sensation Justin Bieber.

Q and Spec both expecting 21/22-26K, don't know why I think they are on different poles with numbers during the discussion though :)

[bieber]

I like Teddy this year, last yr Q gave bigger sofad projection and teddy was conservative

[qesehmk]

Why only you, I like Teddy better than my SELF this year !! I wish he is right about real SOFAD following trackitt trend and creating a windfall for SOFAD.


I like Teddy this year, last yr Q gave bigger sofad projection and teddy was conservative

[TeddyKoochu]

So tha's about 18K in 2011.

Based on my discussions w Spec and Teddy the ROW-EB2 2011 demand would be somewhere near 24-28K. I know Teddy thinks its less than that. Wonder what these other gurus think about it.

Friends I just researched Trackitt again to see the EB2 ROW trend looks like the approvals are accelerating now. If we compare the EB2 ROW + EB2 NIW approvals for Oct - Jan for both years the following results come up 169/245, lets make this ratio 180/245 as the full month of Jan has not elapsed and some folks put in approvals late.
EB2 ROW consumption last year = 43000 - 6000 - 9500 = 27500.
Now the trend shows that the consumption is (180/245) * 27500 ~ 20K.
Since we are back to regular cap now EB2 ROW SOFAD ~= 40K-20K-5.5K ~= 14.5K.
Now the EB1 Trackitt trend seems to be too far from reality lets assume that EB1 will not give us any SOFAD to be conservative.
Total EB2 SOFAD = 20K (Adding India & China).
EB5 ~ 7K.
So even the most conservative calculation leads us to atleast 27K. If EB2 ROW consumption accelerates this could all crumble like a pack of cards. This SOFAD will take us to 01-JAN-2007. Unfortunately there seems to be no good way to compute EB1.
If EB1 were to decline even 25% it adds 10K to the SOFAD, if we assume that that we get say 5K from EB1 maybe we can call the range as 01-JAN-2007 to 01-MAR-2007. Iam assuming 6K PD porting.

[angryclubs]

Veni Thanks.

Now lets get back to business. Will update the header with latest 485 inventory and everything that other gurus have been predicting by late evening tonight.

Can't wait to see the updates!!

[angryclubs]

There are currently 16 users browsing this thread. (4 members and 12 guests)
angryclubs bieber qesehmk TeddyKoochu

May I ask our 12 guests to register and become active members of this forum?

[TeddyKoochu]

Why only you, I like Teddy better than my SELF this year !! I wish he is right about real SOFAD following trackitt trend and creating a windfall for SOFAD.

I like Teddy this year, last yr Q gave bigger sofad projection and teddy was conservative

Guys I assume, looks like it maybe kudos or shoes for me in Sep 2011, if our friend Spec is right then it will definitely be purely shoes:).

Now coming to the perm acceleration most EB2 ROW folks have the luxury of filing the I140 and 485 concurrently or they can file the I140 in premium processing and then 485. The Jan 2011 inventory should I believe have shown this trend partly if not in its entirety. I do however notice that ROW approvals now are only 25% down than 33% when I checked at the beginning of the year.

[Spectator]

Guys I assume, looks like it maybe kudos or shoes for me in Sep 2011, if our friend Spec is right then it will definitely be purely shoes:).

Now coming to the perm acceleration most EB2 ROW folks have the luxury of filing the I140 and 485 concurrently or they can file the I140 in premium processing and then 485. The Jan 2011 inventory should I believe have shown this trend partly if not in its entirety. I do however notice that ROW approvals now are only 25% down than 33% when I checked at the beginning of the year.It will never be shoes Teddy! :) Never!

We each have different approaches to the same problem, which is a very good situation to have.

For EB2-ROW (for me that means no M or P included, as on Trackitt) for instance, I am trying a slightly different way at looking at the Trackitt data.

Since the whole PERM situation is now much more current-current, I have thought that the Trackitt approvals might be more linear this year, rather than the huge surge at the beginning of the year.

There still was something of a surge, but tracked this way, the numbers have started to steady out at around 23k for the year. If M & P contribute around 3k again, that would be 26k in total for EB2-Non IC and provide around 8.5k Fall Across.

Of course, it has the potential to fall like a house of cards, but it is consistent with the derived EB2-ROW approvals by other methods, so I am happy to stick with it for the moment.

I admit that EB1 is a complete conundrum and I am stumped as how to arrive at a reliable figure. I am left only with gut instinct and to rely on the historical trend.

I suspect who gets the plaudits :D and who gets the boot :o (metaphorically speaking) depends on how EB1 pans out.

At the end of the day, all of us want the SOFAD figure to be as high as possible.

[TeddyKoochu]

It will never be shoes Teddy! :) Never!

We each have different approaches to the same problem, which is a very good situation to have.

For EB2-ROW (for me that means no M or P included, as on Trackitt) for instance, I am trying a slightly different way at looking at the Trackitt data.

Since the whole PERM situation is now much more current-current, I have thought that the Trackitt approvals might be more linear this year, rather than the huge surge at the beginning of the year.

There still was something of a surge, but tracked this way, the numbers have started to steady out at around 23k for the year. If M & P contribute around 3k again, that would be 26k in total for EB2-Non IC and provide around 8.5k Fall Across.

Of course, it has the potential to fall like a house of cards, but it is consistent with the derived EB2-ROW approvals by other methods, so I am happy to stick with it for the moment.

I admit that EB1 is a complete conundrum and I am stumped as how to arrive at a reliable figure. I am left only with gut instinct and to rely on the historical trend.

I suspect who gets the plaudits :D and who gets the boot :o (metaphorically speaking) depends on how EB1 pans out.

At the end of the day, all of us want the SOFAD figure to be as high as possible.

Thanks. The SOFAD right now varies from Spec - Teddy all depends on EB1 and ye dill maange more (My heart wants more). I was kidding about the shoes , I hope I don't get them or the boot :) as you say.

[veni001]

Hi veni.

I must admit you have lost me as to how you arrive at demand of 1k per month.

I think there are dangers to looking at the FY2009 data. Huge backlog reduction was under way and completions in some months were as high as 18-19k.

Another way to perhaps look at it is to say there were 74k I-140 completions in FY2010.

If 20k of these related to EB1, then 54k related to EB2/EB3.

If 50% of these were EB2 and 55% were Countries other than India and China that gives 14.85k EB2-ROW I-140s.

That would be 32.67k I-485 for EB2-ROW. We know that there were actually 27.4k approvals in FY2010 so that is a factor of 84%.

Currently, the average completions in FY2011 would give 65k for the year. Removing EB1 of 19k (because there are less visas) gives 46k. Using the 50% and 55% factors again gives 12.65k EB2 (non I or C) and 27.83k I-485. At 84% factor, that would be 23.38k I-485 approvals, which is 4k less than FY2010.

But, completions are running at a very low rate. If the current Receipt and Completions rates continued, the pending numbers would climb from 24k in September 2010 to just over 50k at the end of FY2011. Even just stabilizing the current Pending numbers would provide more than enough extra completions to match and exceed last year's figures.

I realize I have made some simplifications, but I think it still illustrates the point. Really, we don't have enough information on what is happening in FY2011, since USCIS have only published figures on I-140 for 2 months of the fiscal year.

Spec,
My Estimate is based on FY 2009 &FY 2010 PERM and I140 completions

FY 2009
ROW PERM Approvals - 16,003
Total i140 Completions - 132,611
Total ROWEB2 i485 approvals - 32,879 ( incl. M&P)
This translates to about 10% of i140 approvals are EB2 ROW

FY 2010
ROW PERM Approvals - 37,255
Total i140 Completions - 73,746
Total ROWEB2 i485 approvals - 27,406( incl. M&P)
This translates to about 12% of i140 approvals are EB2 ROW

Assume that the i140 demand and EB2 i140 approvals will stay about the same ( 10-12%) then we are looking at about 9K EB2 i140 approvals for FY 2011 which translates to 19.8k EB2 ROW i485's for the entire year!:)

[haripathhi]

There are currently 16 users browsing this thread. (4 members and 12 guests)
angryclubs bieber qesehmk TeddyKoochu

May I ask our 12 guests to register and become active members of this forum?

Alright angryclubs, here you go. I don't want to be clubbed by you ;-) Lol! Thanks everyone for your insight into the predictions and Q, your service in putting up this forum is much much appreciated!

[qesehmk]

sha_kus,

Thanks for the info. This came out last week and there was some good discussion a couple of pages back on that topic.

Based on this info ... I still haven't updated the top of the thread. Planning to do so late tonight.


Congrats on the new site Q.

The Annual Report is out at
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY10AnnualReport-TableV-PartII.pdf

And all staticstics at
http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/statistics/statistics_5240.html

Thanks
S

[Spectator]

p.s. BTW if you don't mind I will use those two charts you created in the header for everybody's benefit. Pls let me know if ok. If you think they need cleanup or corrections and want to wait ... that's fine too.Q,

No problem at all. I completely missed this when you originally posted it.

I'll just check them again and send you the location. I think I have updated them with the real FY2010 figures as well now.

My only comment would be that the spillover interpretation changed and only 2008 onwards are directly comparable. Also some earlier years are distorted by the effects of Visa Recapture.

I'll try to get them to you tomorrow, but I have quite a busy day.

Spec

[qesehmk]

As promised I have updated the header. Unfortunately its a very tough message. I wish I have made some mistake in my calculations.

But as of now EB2IC seem doomed. Sorry that the news is extremely bitter. But as I said, the objective of this blog and thread is to bring clarity to GC process. I don't want to give false hope to anyone.

Please check the head of the thread for further details.

[TexDBoy]

Thats a tragedy then Q. If this predicted worst case trend holds true and if the porting increases a bit (more than 6K), then theoretically, EB2 will not move or move very little until EB3 catches up a bit with it. Is my understanding correct?

[arorasa]

As promised I have updated the header. Unfortunately its a very tough message. I wish I have made some mistake in my calculations.

But as of now EB2IC seem doomed. Sorry that the news is extremely bitter. But as I said, the objective of this blog and thread is to bring clarity to GC process. I don't want to give false hope to anyone.

Please check the head of the thread for further details.

Aw man. What a bummer. Just a few posts above yours Teddy seemed to be predicting a SOFAD of 27K. I thought he was the conservative one! :confused:

[qesehmk]

I am sorry guys for deliverying a tough message. The inventory report didn't make any dent into our thinking. Its the 2010 approval actual data published recently that changed the whole thing.

The fact that EB1 continues to file 45-46K NEW cases in a year is very troublesome for EB2 because it practically blocks all SOFAD coming from EB5. And the fact that EB2-ROW continues to approve even at 3/4th rate as compared to 2010 is also not comforting.

Now I have may have gone overboard in terms of thinking that EB2-ROW will have that much new demand AND will at the same time clear all its backlog of 10K. So lets say for sake of argument, that EB2-ROW continues to carry 10K backlog in 2011 then that gives EB2 10k of SOFAD. With 5.6 already in the bag that's 15.6K which is barely enough to scrape through OCtober 2006.


Thats a tragedy then Q. If this predicted worst case trend holds true and if the porting increases a bit (more than 6K), then theoretically, EB2 will not move or move very little until EB3 catches up a bit with it. Is my understanding correct?


Aw man. What a bummer. Just a few posts above yours Teddy seemed to be predicting a SOFAD of 27K. I thought he was the conservative one! :confused:

[kd2008]

As promised I have updated the header. Unfortunately its a very tough message. I wish I have made some mistake in my calculations.

But as of now EB2IC seem doomed. Sorry that the news is extremely bitter. But as I said, the objective of this blog and thread is to bring clarity to GC process. I don't want to give false hope to anyone.

Please check the head of the thread for further details.

Thanks, Q. It is in line with what I think and have been saying.

I saw the following on immigration-law.com


Quote: "01/25/2011: House Bill Introduced Yesterday to Grant Green Cards and Numerical Limitation Waiver for U.S. Earned STEM Ph.D

* Rep. Jeff Flake (R) of Arizona introduces H.R.399 in the House on 01/24/2011 to authorize certain aliens who have earned a Ph.D. degree from a United States institution of higher education in a field of science, technology, engineering, or mathematics (STEM) to be admitted for permanent residence and to be exempted from the numerical limitations on H-1B nonimmigrants. Last year, he was successful to add his amendment to 'America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010' in the final House version to express the sense of Congress that advance educated STEM foreigners should be retained, but this amendment was dropped in the House-Senate conference process and failed in the final bill which has been enacted into a law, P.L. 111-358. In 2007, he introduced and failed "STRIVE Act of 2007" which was his version of comprehensive immigration reform bill as oppposed to Rep. Luis Gutierrez pro-undocumented alien comprehensive immigration reform bill. He has shown immigration reform in his own way and his own ideology focusing on border security and employment-based immigration system reform to expand immigration opportunities for highly educated alien professionals to participate in the economic security of the country. As soon as the full text is made available, we will report the full text. Please stay tuned."

I know bills like this go nowhere. But just a ray of hope for those who want to hang on.

[qesehmk]

KD

Thanks. I think this particular amendment is quite practical and easy to sell. If enacted this has good potential to positively affect EB2 situation.


Thanks, Q. It is in line with what I think and have been saying.

I saw the following on immigration-law.com


Quote: "01/25/2011: House Bill Introduced Yesterday to Grant Green Cards and Numerical Limitation Waiver for U.S. Earned STEM Ph.D

* Rep. Jeff Flake (R) of Arizona introduces H.R.399 in the House on 01/24/2011 to authorize certain aliens who have earned a Ph.D. degree from a United States institution of higher education in a field of science, technology, engineering, or mathematics (STEM) to be admitted for permanent residence and to be exempted from the numerical limitations on H-1B nonimmigrants. Last year, he was successful to add his amendment to 'America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010' in the final House version to express the sense of Congress that advance educated STEM foreigners should be retained, but this amendment was dropped in the House-Senate conference process and failed in the final bill which has been enacted into a law, P.L. 111-358. In 2007, he introduced and failed "STRIVE Act of 2007" which was his version of comprehensive immigration reform bill as oppposed to Rep. Luis Gutierrez pro-undocumented alien comprehensive immigration reform bill. He has shown immigration reform in his own way and his own ideology focusing on border security and employment-based immigration system reform to expand immigration opportunities for highly educated alien professionals to participate in the economic security of the country. As soon as the full text is made available, we will report the full text. Please stay tuned."

I know bills like this go nowhere. But just a ray of hope for those who want to hang on.

[Spectator]

As promised I have updated the header. Unfortunately its a very tough message. I wish I have made some mistake in my calculations.

But as of now EB2IC seem doomed. Sorry that the news is extremely bitter. But as I said, the objective of this blog and thread is to bring clarity to GC process. I don't want to give false hope to anyone.

Please check the head of the thread for further details.Q,

You are frightening even me with the latest figures.

I am not entirely sure how you have calculated the EB1 Demand.

Your table reflects potential demand and gives the worst case scenario if that translated into approvals.

However, I am not sure it reflects the discussions that we have all been having on the forum.

Possibly, it needs a section that gives the best estimates for actual approvals (and maybe backlog carried through) and then the SOFAD calculation would run off that.

I don't think any of us believe that EB1 will consume 53k visas or that I or C will consume 8 or 9k each. None of us have talked about total SOFAD to EB2 of 7.3k as a realistic scenario.

I think you should present the best thinking (perhaps a mid point) and describe the up and downsides in the narrative.

I'm not sure why you are showing SOFAD in EB3 9.6k. EB3-I & C cannot receive more than 2.8 and 2.5k visas respectively. If there are any "spare" visas utilized in EB3, it would be by M & P at the expense of ROW.

These are brief comments. I haven't had time to study your post fully and analyze the figures properly and I probably won't until this evening.

Some thoughts to ponder on.

[qesehmk]

Spec

I know I would frighten anybody. And let me explain why this changed so much from what we have been discussing.

But before that .... quickly speaking .... keep EB3 out of this. Since this thread is EB2 .... I didn't calculate EB3 (which involves some finetuning between other workers and rest of EB3). So EB3 numbers are not solid. However they don't impact EB2. So we are good on this forum. I will separately update EB3 thread and then update EB3 here too.

Coming back to what changed:

1) EB2 ROW
Our discussions were always around ROW-EB2. So nothing really changed there other than I calculated PURE EB2-ROW NEW demand (lets say X) as follows:
... X = 2010 Actual Approvals - Dec 09 Inv + Oct 10 Inv
This "NEW DEMAND" indicates how many new 485s were filed in that year.
For 2010 this number came in as 27336 (ROW), 1095 (Mexico), 3477 (Philipines) = 31.9K

Incidently this exactly correlates to the I-140 approved last year for ROW-MP EB2. Which means that all of those 140s were traslated to 485 being filed (which again makes sense since ROW continues to be current.

Now if we assume that in 2011 the demand will be 3/4th of this number = 24K ; then thats what my new model assumes. So no surprises there.

2) EB1
However, we had never discussed calculating EB1 demand for 2011.
Now before we do that we at least need to understand the 2010 PURE NEW demand for EB1. Using same formula as above... that comes to 45.7K.
This begs the question is there any reason why in 2010 EB1 will see unusual demand. I do not have any reason here. And so we have no option but assuming that in 2011 we will continue to see similar levels.

3) The role of Backlog

Our discussions never explicitely discussed relatively higher level of EB1 and EB2-ROW backlog at the end of Sep 2010. This is a fact that the backlog is higher in both categories compared to Dec 09 levels. So the question is even if there is SOFAD in 2011, will USCIS choose to clear this backlog or will USCIS choose to pass it on to EB2.

I as always take conservative approach in assuming that the former will happen.


So that's the rationale so far. Pls feel free to point out any errors / improvements. On this one I will be really happy to be proven wrong since like you I too have a personal stake in it !!!







Q,

You are frightening even me with the latest figures.

I am not entirely sure how you have calculated the EB1 Demand.

Your table reflects potential demand and gives the worst case scenario if that translated into approvals.

However, I am not sure it reflects the discussions that we have all been having on the forum.

Possibly, it needs a section that gives the best estimates for actual approvals (and maybe backlog carried through) and then the SOFAD calculation would run off that.

I don't think any of us believe that EB1 will consume 53k visas or that I or C will consume 8 or 9k each. None of us have talked about total SOFAD to EB2 of 7.3k as a realistic scenario.

I think you should present the best thinking (perhaps a mid point) and describe the up and downsides in the narrative.

I'm not sure why you are showing SOFAD in EB3 9.6k. EB3-I & C cannot receive more than 2.8 and 2.5k visas respectively. If there are any "spare" visas utilized in EB3, it would be by M & P at the expense of ROW.

These are brief comments. I haven't had time to study your post fully and analyze the figures properly and I probably won't until this evening.

Some thoughts to ponder on.

[gcseeker]

I know my post will not add much to the discussion and will anyhow be ignored as usual. I have not spent as much time as you guys ( qesehmk,Teddy,Spec) in understanding the models and predict based on that. However just wanted to air this out .

Qesehmk is absolutely right in his prediction for 2011 and I would say he is being optimistic. All I have to back that up is this ,back in sep 2010 when I posted some links on people porting in huge numbers ( news link had quote straight from the horse's mouth,Oppenheimer the head of the divison that prepares the visa bulletins ) he had expected no movement in EB2 for atleast a year and a half. Even if rest of the backlogs in EB1 and rest of the headwinds improve, EB3-EB2 porting will consume much higher than is being estimated by the model (4k-6k) , EB3-EB2 cases are not being reported very well on trackitt but other immigration forums have a lot of info .So even if the rest improves , porting will consume the spillover easily.

Also just from day to day observation of the people around me , many stuck in the EB3 line are porting to EB2 with PD's prior to 2006. Also USCIS always needs money and when an EB3-EB2 conversion can net you around 10K why go through the fiasco of suddenly making the EB2 current and then running away with the money.

Anywaz I apologize if the above post ruffles any feathers...just had to get it out .

[Spectator]

Q,

One thing that did occur to me in relation to EB1 (as I walked around clutching your table :eek:):

Since EB1 is Current, it allows Concurrent Filing. This means that there will be a certain number of I-485s that do not have underlying approved I-140s.

Over time, some, maybe most will get approved, but many will get denied and that Demand won't translate into Approvals.

For EB1, I suspect the denial rate is a significant factor. EB1A in particular, can be self filed. I have observed a fair number of RFEs and NOIDs for EB1A cases on Trackitt in the discussions. I don't know if these are reflected in the Trackitt statistics - I suspect not. I have no idea about B & C.

It therefore may not be surprising that EB1 Demand looks high and you may have to apply a factor to the Demand figures to arrive at Approvals.

If you thought EB1 would have 40k approvals, at the simplest level, the factor would be 40/53 or around 75%.

At the moment, that is the only way I can rationalize the paradox.

Sorry, I didn't realize that EB3 was untouched.

[nuvikas]

The new analysis is pretty scary but may be more in line with the reality. I have to wait one more year as my PD is Dec 2006 - EB2.

[admin]

gcseeker ... sorry never meant to ignore or disrespect you. pls always feel free to contribute. Nobody knows the truth here.. We are all blind!!


I know my post will not add much to the discussion and will anyhow be ignored as usual. I have not spent as much time as you guys ( qesehmk,Teddy,Spec) in understanding the models and predict based on that. However just wanted to air this out .

Qesehmk is absolutely right in his prediction for 2011 and I would say he is being optimistic. All I have to back that up is this ,back in sep 2010 when I posted some links on people porting in huge numbers ( news link had quote straight from the horse's mouth,Oppenheimer the head of the divison that prepares the visa bulletins ) he had expected no movement in EB2 for atleast a year and a half. Even if rest of the backlogs in EB1 and rest of the headwinds improve, EB3-EB2 porting will consume much higher than is being estimated by the model (4k-6k) , EB3-EB2 cases are not being reported very well on trackitt but other immigration forums have a lot of info .So even if the rest improves , porting will consume the spillover easily.

Also just from day to day observation of the people around me , many stuck in the EB3 line are porting to EB2 with PD's prior to 2006. Also USCIS always needs money and when an EB3-EB2 conversion can net you around 10K why go through the fiasco of suddenly making the EB2 current and then running away with the money.

Anywaz I apologize if the above post ruffles any feathers...just had to get it out .




... It therefore may not be surprising that EB1 Demand looks high and you may have to apply a factor to the Demand figures to arrive at Approvals.



Spec .... think about the PURE NEW DEMAND AS demand that hits DoS rather than demand at USCIS. The X I talked about above is this demand. This demand has all kinds of denial rates built into it. Right?

[Spectator]

I know my post will not add much to the discussion and will anyhow be ignored as usual. I have not spent as much time as you guys ( qesehmk,Teddy,Spec) in understanding the models and predict based on that. However just wanted to air this out .

Qesehmk is absolutely right in his prediction for 2011 and I would say he is being optimistic. All I have to back that up is this ,back in sep 2010 when I posted some links on people porting in huge numbers ( news link had quote straight from the horse's mouth,Oppenheimer the head of the divison that prepares the visa bulletins ) he had expected no movement in EB2 for atleast a year and a half. Even if rest of the backlogs in EB1 and rest of the headwinds improve, EB3-EB2 porting will consume much higher than is being estimated by the model (4k-6k) , EB3-EB2 cases are not being reported very well on trackitt but other immigration forums have a lot of info .So even if the rest improves , porting will consume the spillover easily.

Also just from day to day observation of the people around me , many stuck in the EB3 line are porting to EB2 with PD's prior to 2006. Also USCIS always needs money and when an EB3-EB2 conversion can net you around 10K why go through the fiasco of suddenly making the EB2 current and then running away with the money.

Anywaz I apologize if the above post ruffles any feathers...just had to get it out .gcseeker,

No feathers ruffled here and thanks for your contribution.

You are quite right to point out that Porting has the ability to completely change the outlook.

If you've followed the discussion, you know how difficult it is to determine.

All we know is that it looked like it was around 3k last year and that there is a potential for 60k people in EB3-I to do so over time (probably much less, since some can't or won't overcome the 3 year degree issue or can't find a qualifying job). We don't know how fast it might accelerate either.

In addition to India, no one has any idea if other Countries have started in earnest.

I agree with you, it is a very scary subject for EB2 SOFAD.

[Spectator]

Spec .... think about the PURE NEW DEMAND AS demand that hits DoS rather than demand at USCIS. The X I talked about above is this demand. This demand has all kinds of denial rates built into it. Right?Q,

But we don't have any data for Demand at either DOS or USCIS for EB1. None of that means a thing for Categories that are Current.

EB1 isn't mentioned at all in the DOS Demand Document and it only represents the backlog on the date the USCIS Inventory was produced. Nothing can be inferred about the actual Demand or Approval rate.

That is why Trackitt is the only source of data about EB1.

Am I being stupid and missing something fundamental here?

[qesehmk]

Spec

EB1 NEW DEMAND at DoS can be inferred by the formular I suggested. Lets assume there is only 1 category for EB.

Now I want to understand how many people filed for 485 and approved in 2010. To answer this

1) there are only "Dec-09 inv" people to begin with.
2) then there are 41.2 or so approvals in 2010 that DoS has confirmed.
3) then there are "Oct-10 inv" people who are in pipeline w/o being approved.

So the people who applied and were approvable were

2) - 1) + 3)

That's what I call NEW DEMAND in 2010 in EB1. MAkes sense?




Q,

But we don't have any data for Demand at either DOS or USCIS for EB1. None of that means a thing for Categories that are Current.

EB1 isn't mentioned at all in the DOS Demand Document and it only represents the backlog on the date the USCIS Inventory was produced. Nothing can be inferred about the actual Demand or Approval rate.

That is why Trackitt is the only source of data about EB1.

Am I being stupid and missing something fundamental here?

[Spectator]

Spec

EB1 NEW DEMAND at DoS can be inferred by the formular I suggested. Lets assume there is only 1 category for EB.

Now I want to understand how many people filed for 485 and approved in 2010. To answer this

1) there are only "Dec-09 inv" people to begin with.
2) then there are 41.2 or so approvals in 2010 that DoS has confirmed.
3) then there are "Oct-10 inv" people who are in pipeline w/o being approved.

So the people who applied and were approvable were

2) - 1) + 3)

That's what I call NEW DEMAND in 2010 in EB1. MAkes sense?Q,

Thanks for showing the patience to explain it to me. I get it now.

That's quite an ingenious calculation.

With such a dynamically changing Category as EB1, it might only give an indicative figure.

For retrogressed Categories, we know that the cases in the Inventory have been pre-adjudicated.

I don't know at what point in the process that Current applications are added to the Inventory figures and I therefore don't know what those cases in the Inventory mean, or even if they are approvable.

I-140s and I-485s are not processed together, except in the rare event that they are part of the TSC Pilot Plus Program (I don't even know if that is still operational).

If the I-485s are entered into the Inventory fairly early, the underlying I-140s may not have been adjudicated. That leaves the possibility of them being removed later if the I-140 is denied.

If they are put on only after the I-140 has been approved, they can only represent "problem" cases, since it doesn't take long to adjudicate an I-485 otherwise. They would then just represent an increase in the Pending numbers.

I favor the first explanation.

PS Did you notice that even the EB1 figures in the January Inventory contained higher numbers in some of the early years, even as far back as 1997? I don't know what to make of that, since they can't have come from Local Offices, otherwise they would have been approved there.

If you have any information on this subject I would love to know.

[TeddyKoochu]

Friends I just researched Trackitt again to see the EB2 ROW trend looks like the approvals are accelerating now. If we compare the EB2 ROW + EB2 NIW approvals for Oct - Jan for both years the following results come up 169/245, lets make this ratio 180/245 as the full month of Jan has not elapsed and some folks put in approvals late.
EB2 ROW consumption last year = 43000 - 6000 - 9500 = 27500.
Now the trend shows that the consumption is (180/245) * 27500 ~ 20K.
Since we are back to regular cap now EB2 ROW SOFAD ~= 40K-20K-5.5K ~= 14.5K.
Now the EB1 Trackitt trend seems to be too far from reality lets assume that EB1 will not give us any SOFAD to be conservative.
Total EB2 SOFAD = 20K (Adding India & China).
EB5 ~ 7K.
So even the most conservative calculation leads us to atleast 27K. If EB2 ROW consumption accelerates this could all crumble like a pack of cards. This SOFAD will take us to 01-JAN-2007. Unfortunately there seems to be no good way to compute EB1.
If EB1 were to decline even 25% it adds 10K to the SOFAD, if we assume that that we get say 5K from EB1 maybe we can call the range as 01-JAN-2007 to 01-MAR-2007. Iam assuming 6K PD porting.

Q appreciate all the time and the midnight oil you burnt to update the header. Its absolutely heartbreaking almost a shellacking. Your calculations look good based on all the assumptions unfortunately if all the assumptions hold then the situation will be as you have outlined. Kudos for putting it out though I can understand how painful it must have been given that all of us have a personal stake in it. Also it’s great that we all know well in advance what is going to happen that have all the hopes till the end and have them shattered. lets now debate some of the assumptions both qualitatively and quantitatively.

- You have assumed the CP to be 15%, I remember reading it somewhere that its just 1% or less for EB2. With the kind of wait times that are there Iam sure people will have a very hard time justifying the future job offer these days it is hard to get H1B extensions approved without showing concrete evidence.

- On EB1 usage I remember that there used to be a user on IV - kondur007 (He first applied in EB2 the EB2-NIW and the EB1-A to get his GC) the and he gave some very helpful insights into EB1. Even when everything kept going south EB1 usage continued to surprise. The reason is that primarily EB1-A and B jobs are fairly isolated from the regular job market, in fact if the market were to go south people are more likely to stay in research and have more publications and apply again. The denial rates for EB1 A and B are very high and RFE's are a norm. For EB1C we would expect the usage to go south if the market goes down however probably it is staying stable because of the onsite / offshore model. So at best lets say that EB1 usage will stay the same. I do agree with Spec that probably Trackitt is the only way to see the EB1 trend however these folks maybe disinclined to enter their profiles because it does not take very long anyway or the general retribution that Eb1C folks especially get. On EB1C I can bet that the screws are being tightened and only genuine folks are getting past more than ever before.

The EB2 ROW trend I compared last years calculations and found that the decline from 2009 to 2010 did give a fairly accurate picture so hopefully the 2010 to 2011 will also be accurate. I do see that because of the acceleration happening the ratio has come down from a 33% decline to a 25% decline. EB2 ROW is going to be the most important and critical pillar. On the perm data figures I believe that we are probably being a little more conservative than usual going by the face values the main point of denial is really the I140, I don’t have any data to say but IMHO there will be a 20 dropout rate.

On the PD porting you are assuming 4K which probably is a little light Iwould put it at 6K, actually FY 2010 has been a huge awakening point especially for Indian folks that its the only way to get GC. The most shocking interpretation comes from the inventory for 2002 months Feb - Dec showed a decline in figures when almost every other saw a rise the reason being that even late 2002 are porting. But even the most pessimistic estimate would be 6K, there are a lot many who are happy with EAD / AP which is probably half of GC.
I just bumped up my post which seems to give 27K SOFAD your honest thoughts on that and what likelihood in terms of percentage you see it happening.

[qesehmk]

Spec

Pls find my comments inside in BLUE. Overall I will say if we keep it simple, its easier to understand, rationalize, digest and accept.


With such a dynamically changing Category as EB1, it might only give an indicative figure.
Yes. But this indicative figure is your average case scenario unless we have a reason to believe 2011 will be different.

I don't know at what point in the process that Current applications are added to the Inventory figures and I therefore don't know what those cases in the Inventory mean, or even if they are approvable.
For current categories such as EB1 this probably doesn't matter. And even if a category is not current, probably its not as risky to only look at throughput (as in NEW DEMAND).

I-140s and I-485s are not processed together, except in the rare event that they are part of the TSC Pilot Plus Program (I don't even know if that is still operational).

If the I-485s are entered into the Inventory fairly early, the underlying I-140s may not have been adjudicated. That leaves the possibility of them being removed later if the I-140 is denied.
If we focus on the throughput then all denials withdrawals are baked into it. So I think this is not a concern.


PS Did you notice that even the EB1 figures in the January Inventory contained higher numbers in some of the early years, even as far back as 1997? I don't know what to make of that, since they can't have come from Local Offices, otherwise they would have been approved there.
I didn't know that. As of now I do not know its significance. This could be because USCIS tends to process slow initially and picks up speed in last quarter. Just a wild guess!!
But as far as this model goes .... I didn't use the latest inventory since the major factor is really 2010 actuals data published by DoS.

[bieber]

I know for a fact that EB1C is really tight this year, TCS almost stopped applying in that category as they can't answer the detailed queries and prove that for every one, this is causing problems for those companies to apply L1s and h1s if needed

TCS is now lookign to hire people who r already here and on h1 and ready for subcontracting, which tells how hard it's getting for them to bring people onsite.

[bieber]

Agencies did great job stopping the abuse, as of now 29month OPT is the only option for fresh graduates, and this year 20K h1 quota for MS grads lasted for really long time(last yr even though regular quota didn't fill, MS quota was quickly consumed)

[TeddyKoochu]

I know for a fact that EB1C is really tight this year, TCS almost stopped applying in that category as they can't answer the detailed queries and prove that for every one, this is causing problems for those companies to apply L1s and h1s if needed

TCS is now lookign to hire people who r already here and on h1 and ready for subcontracting, which tells how hard it's getting for them to bring people onsite.

There was a thread on Trackitt some days back that suggested that somebody who had gotten approved in EB1C had GC rescinded because somebody in the company simlarly qualified was put in EB3 and there was a complaint which was followed up by a site visit. Also the EB1C RFE's are on the rise and without verifying the org chart nobody is being approved these days. There are a couple of posts on Trackitt suggesting that Eb1C I140 itself is taking 10 months.

[bieber]

There was a thread on Trackitt some days back that suggested that somebody who had gotten approved in EB1C had GC rescinded because somebody in the company simlarly qualified was put in EB3 and there was a complaint which was followed up by a site visit. Also the EB1C RFE's are on the rise and without verifying the org chart nobody is being approved these days. There are a couple of posts on Trackitt suggesting that Eb1C I140 itself is taking 10 months.

besides, there is 2000 increase in the fees for L1/H1s for these companies,

[TeddyKoochu]

besides, there is 2000 increase in the fees for L1/H1s for these companies,

Here is the link. http://www.trackitt.com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/645182089/l1-l1a-eb1c-busted

Bieber I agree with you even I have read and heard the same no more H1b extensions even.

[qesehmk]

Bieber, Teddy,

I hope your guess about EB1 is right and this year we see less approvals. Probably in March we can take a bearing on EB1 approvals on trackitt and see if we need to adjust out predictions.
Right now do you think the examples you are giving compelling enough to warrant reduction in EB1 demand for 2011?



besides, there is 2000 increase in the fees for L1/H1s for these companies,


Here is the link. http://www.trackitt.com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/645182089/l1-l1a-eb1c-busted

Bieber I agree with you even I have read and heard the same no more H1b extensions even.

[pch053]

This might be a very basic question: Does anybody know the breakup of EB1 into EB1-A, EB1-B and EB1-C categories. I personally don't have firsthand information about EB1-C but that's probably the category that has been misused the most.

I can speak of a few friends/colleagues of mine who have got their GC's recently through EB1-A. For two of my colleagues, our employer submitted their applications under EB2 (both of them have Phds from well known US schools); due to the backlog for EB2-I/C, they also simultaneously pursued their applications under EB1-A category and got their approval in less than a year from the date of I140 submission. I talked with their lawyer as I also wanted to explore this option. One of the feedback I got from the lawyer is that the # of submissions under EB1A have increased recently, especially for folks from India/China. I doubt that the number of EB1-B submissions will increase drastically because that will imply a lot of new research jobs have been created in the last year (which seems counter-intuitive to me). I don't know how much this increase will contribute to the overall EB1 usage. If a substantial chunk of EB1 usage is from EB1-C, then the above will have minimal impact; otherwise, it will contribute to more EB1 visas in the coming year/s.

Thanks for any pointers on this!

[angryclubs]

Friends,
I just posted a question to the President at the official youtube site. I hope he picks my question to respond on Thursday. You can post questions at http://youtube.com/askobama

"Mr. President, There are roughly 45000 individuals with advanced degrees or exceptional abilities waiting in the legal immigration queue. Who are you going to help? Them or illegal immigrants who do not add any value to the economy and how?"

[Spectator]

This might be a very basic question: Does anybody know the breakup of EB1 into EB1-A, EB1-B and EB1-C categories. I personally don't have firsthand information about EB1-C but that's probably the category that has been misused the most.

I can speak of a few friends/colleagues of mine who have got their GC's recently through EB1-A. For two of my colleagues, our employer submitted their applications under EB2 (both of them have Phds from well known US schools); due to the backlog for EB2-I/C, they also simultaneously pursued their applications under EB1-A category and got their approval in less than a year from the date of I140 submission. I talked with their lawyer as I also wanted to explore this option. One of the feedback I got from the lawyer is that the # of submissions under EB1A have increased recently, especially for folks from India/China. I doubt that the number of EB1-B submissions will increase drastically because that will imply a lot of new research jobs have been created in the last year (which seems counter-intuitive to me). I don't know how much this increase will contribute to the overall EB1 usage. If a substantial chunk of EB1 usage is from EB1-C, then the above will have minimal impact; otherwise, it will contribute to more EB1 visas in the coming year/s.

Thanks for any pointers on this!The EB1 breakdown into A, B and C can be found in the tables associated with the DHS Yearbook of Immigration Statistics (Table 7). http://www.dhs.gov/files/statistics/publications/yearbook.shtm

For the period FY2005 to FY2009 the ratios have been :

EB1A - 20%
EB1B - 20%
EB1C - 60%

The only blip was in FY2008, when the ratios were 22%, 28% and 50% respectively.

[qesehmk]

Hey.... Thanks for the info. Gave you greens for that.

p.s. As KD commented below, yes I did give greens for AC's effort. I do think I would have asked the same question dfferently and without accusing other immigrants.


Friends,
I just posted a question to the President at the official youtube site. I hope he picks my question to respond on Thursday. You can post questions at http://youtube.com/askobama

"Mr. President, There are roughly 45000 individuals with advanced degrees or exceptional abilities waiting in the legal immigration queue. Who are you going to help? Them or illegal immigrants who do not add any value to the economy and how?"

[qesehmk]

Friends,

As per suggestions from several of you, I have deleted some of the off topic discussion/argument including one of my own!

My experience is - almost all of us are decent people, respectful of each other. But once in a while one of us can let our emotions get the better of us. Its our collective responsibility to stay calm and not react to it.

I respect your posts and would really like to avoid this kind of moderation in future.

[qesehmk]

Teddy,

Thanks. Please see my comments inline.. in BLUE




- You have assumed the CP to be 15%, I remember reading it somewhere that its just 1% or less for EB2.
I haven't really allocated 15% to CP in my model. So that's actually a headwind. I will make it clear in the header.

- On EB1 usage I remember that there used to be a user on IV - kondur007 (He first applied in EB2 the EB2-NIW and the EB1-A to get his GC) the and he gave some very helpful insights into EB1. Even when everything kept going south EB1 usage continued to surprise. The reason is that primarily EB1-A and B jobs are fairly isolated from the regular job market, in fact if the market were to go south people are more likely to stay in research and have more publications and apply again. The denial rates for EB1 A and B are very high and RFE's are a norm. For EB1C we would expect the usage to go south if the market goes down however probably it is staying stable because of the onsite / offshore model. So at best lets say that EB1 usage will stay the same. I do agree with Spec that probably Trackitt is the only way to see the EB1 trend however these folks maybe disinclined to enter their profiles because it does not take very long anyway or the general retribution that Eb1C folks especially get. On EB1C I can bet that the screws are being tightened and only genuine folks are getting past more than ever before.
Teddy thanks again. It seems that you don't really think that there are strong reasons why EB1 overall in 2010 should go down. USCIS is always vigilant about abuse. So I personally wouldn't think that is a strong enough reason to say EB1 will decline. Having said that, I think we should continue to monitor trackitt for signs of significant declines.

The EB2 ROW trend I compared last years calculations and found that the decline from 2009 to 2010 did give a fairly accurate picture so hopefully the 2010 to 2011 will also be accurate. I do see that because of the acceleration happening the ratio has come down from a 33% decline to a 25% decline. EB2 ROW is going to be the most important and critical pillar. On the perm data figures I believe that we are probably being a little more conservative than usual going by the face values the main point of denial is really the I140, I don’t have any data to say but IMHO there will be a 20 dropout rate.
Teddy I have assumed your "25% decline in EB-2ROW demand" assumption. As per rate of denial withdrawal .... all that is already baked into the way I have calculated PURE NEW DEMAND.

On the PD porting you are assuming 4K which probably is a little light Iwould put it at 6K.
Agree.

I just bumped up my post which seems to give 27K SOFAD your honest thoughts on that and what likelihood in terms of percentage you see it happening.
Teddy I think I found a flaw in my logic as I was about to write about a flaw in yours. I am calculating PURE NEW DEMAND in 2010 for ROW which was about 32K. This exactly matches the I-140 surge. However then I apply 25% reduction on this demand and then assume all backlog gets taken care of. For EB1 my approach is ok where the demand itself is not changing. However for ROW there was this surge that may be going away in a big way. For ROW the usual annual EB2 demand is 8-16K at 485 level (including MP).

I think we need to establish I-140 demand reduction YoY.

[veni001]

Teddy,

Thanks. Please see my comments inline.. in BLUE

.................
Teddy thanks again. It seems that you don't really think that there are strong reasons why EB1 overall in 2010 should go down. USCIS is always vigilant about abuse. So I personally wouldn't think that is a strong enough reason to say EB1 will decline. Having said that, I think we should continue to monitor trackitt for signs of significant declines
..................



Q, Teddy,
Not only trackitt but also i140 trending from USCIS dash board !

[qesehmk]

Veni

140 completions are trending slight down. But Receipts are actually flat or trending up while the pending is trending up. Right?


Q, Teddy,
Not only trackitt but also i140 trending from USCIS dash board !

[bieber]

Q

I don't know if what we are seeing at personal level will actually reflect in the numbers exactly, but the experiences are similar to what happened with h1s in last 2 years. if not there is huge cut down in the consumption, there would be atleast delay i guess, until things get little better and companies resume previous practises.

Obama mentioned in his speech last night about MS/Phd degree holders, and if they walk their talk and pass the bill to remove the lottery and assign it to EB, wonders will happen.

[bieber]

Teddy

Thanks for the trackitt link, there are all different kinds of people on these forums, some people just get the sadistic pleasure by creating such stories, leaving the benefit of doubt explained situation is somewhat is close to reality

[qesehmk]

Q

I don't know if what we are seeing at personal level will actually reflect in the numbers exactly, but the experiences are similar to what happened with h1s in last 2 years. if not there is huge cut down in the consumption, there would be atleast delay i guess, until things get little better and companies resume previous practises.

Obama mentioned in his speech last night about MS/Phd degree holders, and if they walk their talk and pass the bill to remove the lottery and assign it to EB, wonders will happen.

Biber, those personal experiences need to be backed by numbers to be able to rely on them. Obama's speech if turns into action for STEM PHDs then that will really work well. But I am not very optimistic about it. However a CNN poll showed that democrats, reps and independents all seemed to agree to Obama's position.

[qesehmk]

Teddy
Thanks for the trackitt link, there are all different kinds of people on these forums, some people just get the sadistic pleasure by creating such stories, leaving the benefit of doubt explained situation is somewhat is close to reality

Bieber, thanks for saying that. I think this topic deserves some discussion.

I tend to believe that somebody who plays by USCIS rules and gets GC in whichever category doesn't deserve to be attacked by fellow immigrants. If indeed there is fraud, there are enough anti-immigrant groups who are already playing the role of vigilantes. Who knows if teh story is planted by one of the anti-immigrants.

Besides, for countries like India and China is it far fetched to imagine that they can send 6K EB1 to US every year? The company I work at didn't have many directors of Indian origin as recently as 5-6 years back. Suddenly in last 5-6 years there are not just directors but VPs and Sr. VPs and CIOs and CFOs of Indian origin. Not all of them are born in US.

So in entire US, I can easily imagine 6K indians being eligible for EB1 every year.

When I did my MBA 7-8 years back, my school had 15% Indians (from India). If I remember correctly even harvard wharton and all other schools had similar ratio. So what's the big deal with Indians or Chinese getting 6K of EB1? (Since many people can also climb management ladder w/o MBA!)

Yes there will be some fraud cases. But that doesn't define the entire demand in that category.

p.s. - not to mention PHDs. There is a significant proportion of IC PHD students.

[TeddyKoochu]

Biber, those personal experiences need to be backed by numbers to be able to rely on them. Obama's speech if turns into action for STEM PHDs then that will really work well. But I am not very optimistic about it. However a CNN poll
showed that democrats, reps and independents all seemed to agree to Obama's position.

- On EB1 usage I remember that there used to be a user on IV - kondur007 (He first applied in EB2 the EB2-NIW and the EB1-A to get his GC) the and he gave some very helpful insights into EB1. Even when everything kept going south EB1 usage continued to surprise. The reason is that primarily EB1-A and B jobs are fairly isolated from the regular job market, in fact if the market were to go south people are more likely to stay in research and have more publications and apply again. The denial rates for EB1 A and B are very high and RFE's are a norm. For EB1C we would expect the usage to go south if the market goes down however probably it is staying stable because of the onsite / offshore model. So at best lets say that EB1 usage will stay the same. I do agree with Spec that probably Trackitt is the only way to see the EB1 trend however these folks maybe disinclined to enter their profiles because it does not take very long anyway or the general retribution that Eb1C folks especially get. On EB1C I can bet that the screws are being tightened and only genuine folks are getting past more than ever before.
Teddy thanks again. It seems that you don't really think that there are strong reasons why EB1 overall in 2010 should go down. USCIS is always vigilant about abuse. So I personally wouldn't think that is a strong enough reason to say EB1 will decline. Having said that, I think we should continue to monitor trackitt for signs of significant declines.




Q here are the numbers from Trackitt, the numbers show a definite trend of huge decline. Especially have a look at EB1-C.

Year 2009 (Oct to Dec) EB1A – 57 EB1B – 97 EB1C – 70 Total - 224
Year 2010 (Oct to Jan) EB1A – 18 EB1B – 22 EB1C – 22 Total - 60

Overall if you notice EB1 is really down. I fully agree with you that those who really qualify for EB1C must get and not everybody is fraud. Indians are slowly moving to top levels across organizations.

Bieber thanks I agree that some people may make up things but looks like giving the benefit of doubt this maybe true. I have a neighbor who works with one of the companies that have been traditionally known to file EB1c's as a Program Manager, forget about EB1c he had to spend a year out of US because his case could not be processed and now he is trying for a GC after starting the next innings on L1A and most likely it will not be EB1C.

Q in light of the Trackitt data and the historical facts I think we can assume that EB1 will not give us any spillover for a very conservative calculation but we should not assume the usage to go up to significantly eat into EB5. Lets consider EB1 to cancel itself, if the Trackitt trend were to hold then we may see wonders in Sep 2011, however for a balanced calculation IMHO even assuming a 25% decline seems to be fair.

[veni001]

Veni

140 completions are trending slight down. But Receipts are actually flat or trending up while the pending is trending up. Right?

Q,
That's right! with exception of June 10 and Aug 10, if the trend continues the same into 2011Q1 then we can stick with your conservative estimates.

Since we may not have other way of tracking EB1/EB2ROW (other than trackitt) we can rely on i140 tending from USCIS dash board until DOS updates their prediction in the VISA bulletin.

[Spectator]

Q here are the numbers from Trackitt, the numbers show a definite trend of huge decline. Especially have a look at EB1-C.

Year 2009 (Oct to Dec) EB1A – 57 EB1B – 97 EB1C – 70 Total - 224
Year 2010 (Oct to Jan) EB1A – 18 EB1B – 22 EB1C – 22 Total - 60

Overall if you notice EB1 is really down. I fully agree with you that those who really qualify for EB1C must get and not everybody is fraud. Indians are slowly moving to top levels across organizations.

Bieber thanks I agree that some people may make up things but looks like giving the benefit of doubt this maybe true. I have a neighbor who works with one of the companies that have been traditionally known to file EB1c's as a Program Manager, forget about EB1c he had to spend a year out of US because his case could not be processed and now he is trying for a GC after starting the next innings on L1A and most likely it will not be EB1C.

Q in light of the Trackitt data and the historical facts I think we can assume that EB1 will not give us any spillover for a very conservative calculation but we should not assume the usage to go up to significantly eat into EB5. Lets consider EB1 to cancel itself, if the Trackitt trend were to hold then we may see wonders in Sep 2011, however for a balanced calculation IMHO even assuming a 25% decline seems to be fair.Teddy,

This is pretty much what I have been trying to say.

I have already pointed out that the % that Trackitt represents for EB1 dropped dramatically between FY2009 and FY2010.

Even using the FY2010 %, the FY2011 approvals are heading for half the allocation.

To me, that can be one of the following:

a) The Trackitt figures reflect reality. This can mean either:

i) The Trackitt approvals will continue at the current rate and we will be in bonusland! :D

ii) The approvals to date are low for some reason and there will be a surge later. :(

b) The Trackitt % has fallen again dramatically. :(

Or a combination of the above.

There is currently no foolproof way to determine which of the options above are true. Over time, (a)(ii) will be proved or disproved.

As for EB1C, I thought that might happen last year as well. It either did and EB1A & EB1B were able to compensate, or EB1C remained a relatively high % of total EB1.

We won't know the answer to that until the DHS Immigration Yearbook is published.

Either way, I don't see a reason why the situation should be substantially different in FY2011.

I don't think there is yet any compelling evidence for either a rise or fall in overall EB1 numbers.

The fact that the monthly I-140 Receipts have stayed relatively stable since March 2010 might be an indication that not a lot has changed.

I think we can only keep a watching brief on EB1 for clues as to which way it will go.

In the meantime, we have to agree on a figure for the SOFAD projection.

My thoughts anyway.

[quizzer]

Q,Teddy and other expert number crunchers,

Can we have an optimistic, pessimistic and most likely dates for EB2I/C in Jul-Sep 2011 based on the latest facts?