Counselar Processing Backlog

Printable View

10-14-2010, 03:30 PM
TeddyKoochu

Counselar Processing Backlog

Quote:

Originally Posted by qesehmk

Teddy you don't have to estimate CP. It is provided as part of NVC inventory. Are you aware of NVC?
6-7K I used was from last year's inventory. Its possible that it has gone down. But since latest NVC inventory is not published I am using 2009 one. If anything this makes our estimates conservative. USCIS has said it previously that CP is typically 15% of total adjustments.

Q if you have a link of the NVC inventory for last year request you to post it. Does the NVC inventory just like the 485 inventory cases till 2007 only then we can assume that 40% is done and 60% is left. Also what component is EB2. If we have say 6K CP inventory just for EB2 then it makes the situation quite bad. I will try to search for what VIN13 had said. I agree with you that it makes the prediction conservative.

On another note just checked the inventory prior to Jan 2007 is 14445 + 5690 ~ 20K. If you assume 20K goes towards inventory reduction assuming 7K CP then in absolute terms it just takes us till 01-JAN-2007. However there will be atleast 4K porting, so it may even be hard to clear 2006 with this SOFAD.
10-14-2010, 03:52 PM
TeddyKoochu

Quote:

Originally Posted by qesehmk

CLICK HERE FOR NVC INVENTORY REPORT - Look for Annual visa waiting list.
This report is published in Nov 09. So not entirely valid. But still useful.

Please note the inventory I have published at the top of the threader assumes 485 + CP + PWMB + Portings.

CP inventory follows the same timeline as 485 since visa dates are same for both. Hope this helps!

Many thanks for the link and your help, really valued.
Refer page # 8 of the document titled "Annual IV Waiting List Report"
For Eb2
Here India shows as 2996, China shows as 996 ~ 4K Total.
Assuming that 50% of he cases got approved in 2010 the cases left should around 2K.
Please advise if Iam reading and interpreting the data correctly.
10-14-2010, 03:55 PM
qesehmk

Quote:

Originally Posted by TeddyKoochu

Many thanks for the link and your help, really valued.
Refer page # 8 of the document titled "Annual IV Waiting List Report"
For Eb2
Here India shows as 2996, China shows as 996 ~ 4K Total.
Assuming that 50% of he cases got approved in 2010 the cases left should around 2K.
Please advise if Iam reading and interpreting the data correctly.

Sure. You are right about 4K. But overall its is 6K (refer page 2).

While you are right that in 2010 half of that may have gone. It is also possible that ROW may have added an equal amount. So to be on safer side I used it as it is for now. In 2 months we will get better numbers.
10-14-2010, 04:09 PM
TeddyKoochu

Quote:

Originally Posted by qesehmk

Sure. You are right about 4K. But overall its is 6K (refer page 2).

While you are right that in 2010 half of that may have gone. It is also possible that ROW may have added an equal amount. So to be on safer side I used it as it is for now. In 2 months we will get better numbers.

Thanks Q for your response, greatly appreciate it. Page # 2 gives the total ROW included. I think I get your point you are trying to get the overall demand which I agree will be conservatively 6K as ROW will add the 2K back even if their 2K originally was approved. This implicitly answers my other question as it raises the figure to clear out the 485 inventory and with this SOFAD end of Feb 07 looks reasonable. I will try to redraw my chart which had the extrapolated inventory (Which I posted previously) and see where that would take us. Ron had published something that the agencies are trying to consolidate everything to one inventory if that is true then it augurs well for us (We may be double counting), I will try to find out any links on that.
10-14-2010, 07:27 PM
Spectator

Q,

I'm rather glad the NVC figures have been mentioned, as I am not entirely clear how you are using them.

As far as I am aware, a case is created when NVC receive the approved I-140 from USCIS.

This means that the NVC figures represent CP cases up to the end of October 2009. Since there is no yearly breakdown, it is impossible to tell how many relate to the USCIS cut off date of August 2007.

Therefore the numbers overstate the CP demand, unless assumptions are made to adjust it.

This may not be overly consequential for EB2, since this has low CP demand anyway, but it is very important when looking at EB3, which has a higher level of CP usage.

If we look at the USCIS Inventory of December 11, 2009 (fairly close time wise to the NVC data):

CP level for ALL EB cases is implied as 38.4% (130,509 of 339,950)

Looking at EB3, the implied levels are:

All EB3 - 42.3% (103,448 of 244,467)
China - 54.5% (7,122 of 13,065)
India - 25.2% (20,467 of 81,341)
Mexico - 30.9% (2,339 of 7,567)
Philippines - 80.4% (45,331 of 56,382)
ROW - 32.7% (28,129 of 86,112)

This differs greatly from other available data:

Previous Year Visa Reports

FY2009
All EB3 - 16.0%
China - 27.0%
India - 13.6%
Mexico - 5.4%
Philippines - 33.8%
ROW - 13.8%

FY2008

All EB3 - 17.2%
China - 29.2%
India - 15.0%
Mexico - 2.9%
Philippines - 39.2%
ROW - 14.7%

Looking at the July 19 IVAMS report versus the May 27 USCIS report showed a derived CP level of c.16% for EB3-ROW. I have not looked at other Countries.

For EB2 the figures are:

NVC & Dec USCIS

All EB2 - 9.0% (not v. meaningful)
China - 5.0%
India - 7.0%
Mexico -
Philippines - 34.1% (not v. meaningful)
ROW & Mexico - 22.0% (not v. meaningful)

Previous Year Visa Reports

FY2009
All EB2 - 2.7%
China - 1.2%
India - 0.7%
Mexico - 2.0%
Philippines - 6.2%
ROW - 2.3%

FY2008
All EB2 - 1.8%
China - 1.1%
India - 1.2%
Mexico - 1.0%
Philippines - 2.2%
ROW - 2.1%

Just to complete the statistics, for ALL EB cases the CP element from the Visa Reports was:

FY2009 - 9.8%
FY2008 - 8.3%

In summary, the NVC report is really interesting data, but is it the best source of information to judge the level of Consular Processing?
10-14-2010, 08:05 PM
qesehmk

Spec

You bring a very good point which is much more general in nature - the point being - "Unlike 485, the PD doesn;t have to be current to file CP".

I think this is true. Which automatically means that the CP inventory could easily reflect post Jul 2007 cases and thus be overstated.

So this makes our estimates conservative if anything. Right? So here is a fun questions - What would be the way to determine how much of CP inventory could be post July 2007?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spectator

Q,

I'm rather glad the NVC figures have been mentioned, as I am not entirely clear how you are using them.

As far as I am aware, a case is created when NVC receive the approved I-140 from USCIS.

This means that the NVC figures represent CP cases up to the end of October 2009. Since there is no yearly breakdown, it is impossible to tell how many relate to the USCIS cut off date of August 2007.

Therefore the numbers overstate the CP demand, unless assumptions are made to adjust it.

This may not be overly consequential for EB2, since this has low CP demand anyway, but it is very important when looking at EB3, which has a higher level of CP usage.

In summary, the NVC report is really interesting data, but is it the best source of information to judge the level of Consular Processing?
10-15-2010, 08:20 AM
Spectator

Quote:

Originally Posted by qesehmk

I think this is true. Which automatically means that the CP inventory could easily reflect post Jul 2007 cases and thus be overstated.

So this makes our estimates conservative if anything. Right?

That's something of an understatement for EB3! For EB3-ROW, the difference is between 15-16% from one source and 33% from the other.

Quote:

Originally Posted by qesehmk

So here is a fun questions - What would be the way to determine how much of CP inventory could be post July 2007?

I think you already know the answer to that question!

The NVC document says "It is important to note that approximately ninety percent of all Employment preference immigrants are currently being processed as adjustment of status cases at CIS offices."

At the most simplistic level, you could say that the 130,509 NVC EB cases therefore represents 1,305,090 total cases.

For EB2-I the normal CP run rate is around 1%, so the 2,996 NVC cases represents 299,600 total cases.

For EB3-I the normal CP run rate is around 15%, so the 20,467 NVC cases represents nearly 136,500 total cases.

When you take off the known USCIS Inventory around that time and predicted CP usage, you are still left with silly figures.

e.g. For EB3-I, the implied total cases at November 2009 is 136,446. The USCIS inventory in December 2009 was 60,874. At 15% CP, that implies total cases were 71,616.
That leaves 64,830 cases as representing September 2007 through October 2009.

For EB2-I, the implied total cases at November 2009 is 299,600. The USCIS inventory in December 2009 was 40,022. At 1% CP, that implies total cases were 40,426.
That leaves 259,174 cases as representing September 2007 through October 2009.

One can only conclude that either:

a) The data isn't what we think it is.
b) There is huge unknown demand we don't know about.
c) There is huge demand in the September 2007 - October 2009 period.
d) The rate of CP is set to increase dramatically in the future.

Or a combination of the above. Or something else.

Either way, the NVC figures are un-analyzable with the information available to us.

Given the figures it produces, I really have to question using it, at least as the sole or major component.

Perhaps someone else can make more sense of it than I can.
10-15-2010, 09:39 AM
qesehmk

Spec you are right. For EB2 it would be conservatism. For EB3 it would be utterly perssimistic and unjustified.

USCIS has previously maintained 15% but it's possible that different categories that % could be different. So we need to calculate and incorporate that.

Howsoever bad CP data is ... the worst thing to do with it is to completely ignore it. We have to find some way to incorporate it given that the numbers are so huge.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spectator

That's something of an understatement for EB3! For EB3-ROW, the difference is between 15-16% from one source and 33% from the other.

I think you already know the answer to that question!

The NVC document says "It is important to note that approximately ninety percent of all Employment preference immigrants are currently being processed as adjustment of status cases at CIS offices."

......

One can only conclude that either:

a) The data isn't what we think it is.
b) There is huge unknown demand we don't know about.
c) There is huge demand in the September 2007 - October 2009 period.
d) The rate of CP is set to increase dramatically in the future.

Or a combination of the above. Or something else.

Either way, the NVC figures are un-analyzable with the information available to us.

Given the figures it produces, I really have to question using it, at least as the sole or major component.

Perhaps someone else can make more sense of it than I can.
10-15-2010, 11:02 AM
Spectator

Quote:

Originally Posted by qesehmk

Spec you are right. For EB2 it would be conservatism. For EB3 it would be utterly perssimistic and unjustified.

USCIS has previously maintained 15% but it's possible that different categories that % could be different. So we need to calculate and incorporate that.

Howsoever bad CP data is ... the worst thing to do with it is to completely ignore it. We have to find some way to incorporate it given that the numbers are so huge.

Q,

It is significant and can't be ignored - I totally agree.

We have KNOWN data for previous years. It can be calculated for EB1, EB4 & EB5 by Group as I have already shown for EB2 and EB3.

The reports go back further than FY2008, so that data can be used as well.

It then becomes a judgement call as to how to use it.

Average?
Extrapolate the trend?
Other method?

Also, if it is purported to be what it says it is, we have a snapshot of ALL documentarily qualified cases for EB3 in the form of the IVAMS reports from July 2010. That can potentially give a second way to look at the EB3 CP levels.

Here's some starter data for EB1, EB2 & EB3 (inc EW):

EB1

Previous Year Visa Reports

FY2009
All EB1 - 3.7% (1,524 of 40,976)
China - 3.5% (175 of 4,999)
India - 1.2% (83 of 6,672)
Mexico - 3.5% (70 of 2,010)
Philippines - 5.9% (31 of 524)
ROW - 4.4% (1,165 of 26771)

FY2008
All EB1 - 4.2% (1,549 of 36,584)
China - 4.7% (264 of 5,602)
India - 1.1% (59 of 5,326)
Mexico - 2.5% (37 of 1,456)
Philippines - 5.5% (17 of 310)
ROW - 4.9% (1,172 of 23,890)

FY2007
All EB1 - 10.3% (2,749 of 26,806)
China - 11.9% (356 of 2,982)
India - 3.6% (104 of 2,855)
Mexico - 7.2% (80 of 1,109)
Philippines - 13.3% (36 of 271)
ROW - 11.1% (2,173 of 19,589)

EB2

Previous Year Visa Reports

FY2009
All EB2 - 2.7%
China - 1.2%
India - 0.7%
Mexico - 2.0%
Philippines - 6.2%
ROW - 2.3%

FY2008
All EB2 - 1.8%
China - 1.1%
India - 1.2%
Mexico - 1.0%
Philippines - 2.2%
ROW - 2.1%

FY2007
All EB2 - 2.7% (1,216 of 44,400)
China - 1.2% (84 of 6,797)
India - 3.3% (207 of 6,203)
Mexico - 7.2% (80 of 1,109)
Philippines - 1.4% (23 of 1,608)
ROW - 2.9% (822 of 28,683)

EB3

Previous Year Visa Reports

FY2009
All EB3 - 16.0%
China - 27.0%
India - 13.6%
Mexico - 5.4%
Philippines - 33.8%
ROW - 13.8%

FY2008
All EB3 - 17.2%
China - 29.2%
India - 15.0%
Mexico - 2.9%
Philippines - 39.2%
ROW - 14.7%

FY2007
All EB3 - 17.6% (13,674 of 77,667)
China - 38.7% (1,425 of 3,681)
India - 21.7% (2,211 of 17,985)
Mexico - 3.5% (357 of 10,174)
Philippines - 34.2% (2,979 of 8,710)
ROW - 18.3% (6,792 of 37,117)

I suspect FY2007 isn't very representative, for a number of reasons.

FY2008 and FY2009 (and FY2010 when it becomes available) represent a time period when USCIS have been reasonably efficient and visas haven't been wasted. Pre 2007, there were many wasted visas due to USCIS inefficiency and the figures would possibly be skewed towards CP because DOS could close out cases and issue approvals in a more efficient manner.