Printable View
I am also really looking forward to the report as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
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
LoL !!
I am sorry I meant DoS report at this link
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
I found the source of my EB5 prediction from earlier in the thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
This document http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Outreach/...014%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.
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,Quote:
Originally Posted by 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.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 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?
Sorry .... didn't understand teh question. Where did I say that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bieber
Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
- 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 lets 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 lets 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 lets 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.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 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:
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.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
Teddy .. I liked your explanation. So beautifully put!Quote:
Originally Posted by TeddyKoochu
Agreed.Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
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 !Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
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!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeddyKoochu
I was told today that EB1 took just 3 months for a friend of my friend..not sure how accurate that is..Quote:
Originally Posted by 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).
Quote:
Originally Posted by srinivasj
Teddy,Quote:
Originally Posted by TeddyKoochu
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.
Attachment 52
PS It might be worth noting that the new Spillover interpretation started being applied in FY2008.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
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 %.Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
See what you make of this chart which plots the same, but by number use. It tells a different story.
Attachment 54
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?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
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!Quote:
Originally Posted by 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
Q,Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
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.
bieber,Quote:
Originally Posted by 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
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 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. 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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
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.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 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 :)Quote:
Originally Posted by 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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bieber
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by bieber
Q,Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
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.
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??Quote:
Originally Posted by TeddyKoochu
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
Teddy,Quote:
Originally Posted by TeddyKoochu
If it was of any help to you then that good to hear.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by TeddyKoochu
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.
I think we have reached a consensus about this.Quote:
Originally Posted by TeddyKoochu
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.
Thanks guys for all the analysis. So are we sticking onto the original prediction for cut-off dates?
Usually they used to have a 40 days lag. Now its been over 100 days and they haven't updated.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectator
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by geevikram