EB2 Predictions (Rather Calculations) - 2011

[veni001]

Please see the link here: http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.g...rterlydata.cfm

Beginning October 1, 2010 (FY 2011), OFLC is posting cumulative quarterly case disclosure data covering the permanent and temporary labor certification programs as well as the new prevailing wage program.

9299 Certified India
1004 Certified China
8052 Certified ROW
18355 Certified Total

in just three months!
This puts an end to ROW demand debate. Its coming and its huge!

KD2008,
Thanks for the link, actually the numbers are in the same ballpark when compared to FY 2010 PERM data which means about 25K EB2ROW demand!

FY 2010 PERM Data(Certified)
Total - 70,237
INDIA- 28,930
CHINA - 4,052
MEX- 3,306
PHIL - 3,305
ROW - 30,644

As we have been discussing for some time now EB1 demand is going to be Key for this year's SOFAD.

[qesehmk]

KD

Thanks. Very useful info. This is a bit disappointing but not much. Even with same approvals as last year there will be reasonable SOFAD (19K or so). But I will wait at least until Q2 data is published since Q1 is likely to have momentum from 2010 PERM APPROVAL SURGE. At the end of 2010 the PERM backlog still had quite a few cases unapproved.

Secondly, even if we don't see much PERM reduction in 2010, its not going to hurt a lot. What will hurt more is SYA i.e. same year approvals.

p.s. - On another note, I have come to the conclusion that ROW 485/labor ratio is around 1.4 rather than 2.2 for EB2I. Historically since 2004 350K ROW PERM were approved and 500K GCs were issued for ROW.

Please see the link here: http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.g...rterlydata.cfm

Beginning October 1, 2010 (FY 2011), OFLC is posting cumulative quarterly case disclosure data covering the permanent and temporary labor certification programs as well as the new prevailing wage program.

9299 Certified India
1004 Certified China
8052 Certified ROW
18355 Certified Total

in just three months!
This puts an end to ROW demand debate. Its coming and its huge!

[Spectator]

A few more statistics.

Outcome – Number ---- %
Certified 18,355 -- 78.93%
Denied --- 4,171 -- 17.94%
Withdrawn -- 729 --- 3.13%
Total --- 23,255 - 100.00%

CERTIFIED CASES
Applied - Number ---- %
FY2011 -- 6,979 -- 38.02%
FY2010 -- 9,004 -- 49.05%
FY2009 -- 1,048 --- 5.71%
FY2008 -- 1,298 --- 7.07%
FY2007 ----- 24 --- 0.13%
FY2006 ------ 1 --- 0.01%
FY2005 ------ 1 --- 0.01%
Total -- 18,355 - 100.00%

Applied = Receipt Date of PERM Application by DOL.

COUNTRY --- Number ---- %
China ------ 1,004 --- 5.47%
India ------ 9,299 -- 50.66%
Mexico ------- 710 --- 3.87%
Philippines –- 746 --- 4.06%
ROW -------- 6,596 -- 35.94%
Total ----- 18,355 - 100.00%

ROW+M+P ---- 8,052 -- 43.87%

[qesehmk]

Spec,

If the decision date was between Oct-Dec 2010 then where r you getting this information from..... see below..

A few more statistics.



CERTIFIED CASES
PD ---- Number ---- %
FY2011 - 6,979 -- 38.02%
FY2010 - 9,004 -- 49.05%
FY2009 - 1,048 --- 5.71%
FY2008 - 1,298 --- 7.07%
FY2007 ---- 24 --- 0.13%
FY2006 ----- 1 --- 0.01%
FY2005 ----- 1 --- 0.01%
Total - 18,355 - 100.00%

[haripathhi]

Spec,

This might be a basic qs for many, however, what does PD stand for? Priority Date / Porting Date?

A few more statistics.

Outcome – Number ---- %
Certified 18,355 -- 78.93%
Denied --- 4,171 -- 17.94%
Withdrawn -- 729 --- 3.13%
Total --- 23,255 - 100.00%

CERTIFIED CASES
PD ---- Number ---- %
FY2011 - 6,979 -- 38.02%
FY2010 - 9,004 -- 49.05%
FY2009 - 1,048 --- 5.71%
FY2008 - 1,298 --- 7.07%
FY2007 ---- 24 --- 0.13%
FY2006 ----- 1 --- 0.01%
FY2005 ----- 1 --- 0.01%
Total - 18,355 - 100.00%

COUNTRY --- Number ---- %
China ------ 1,004 --- 5.47%
India ------ 9,299 -- 50.66%
Mexico ------- 710 --- 3.87%
Philippines –- 746 --- 4.06%
ROW -------- 6,596 -- 35.94%
Total ----- 18,355 - 100.00%

ROW+M+P ---- 8,052 -- 43.87%

[dec_01_2006]

Are these EB-2 #'s or consolidated figures for all EB categories.

A few more statistics.

Outcome – Number ---- %
Certified 18,355 -- 78.93%
Denied --- 4,171 -- 17.94%
Withdrawn -- 729 --- 3.13%
Total --- 23,255 - 100.00%

CERTIFIED CASES
PD ---- Number ---- %
FY2011 - 6,979 -- 38.02%
FY2010 - 9,004 -- 49.05%
FY2009 - 1,048 --- 5.71%
FY2008 - 1,298 --- 7.07%
FY2007 ---- 24 --- 0.13%
FY2006 ----- 1 --- 0.01%
FY2005 ----- 1 --- 0.01%
Total - 18,355 - 100.00%

COUNTRY --- Number ---- %
China ------ 1,004 --- 5.47%
India ------ 9,299 -- 50.66%
Mexico ------- 710 --- 3.87%
Philippines –- 746 --- 4.06%
ROW -------- 6,596 -- 35.94%
Total ----- 18,355 - 100.00%

ROW+M+P ---- 8,052 -- 43.87%

[Spectator]

Spec,

If the decision date was between Oct-Dec 2010 then where r you getting this information from..... see below..

The Case No. Contains the Julian No of the Application Date.

eg A-10322-32895 shows the Application Date was the 322nd day of 2010 or 11/18/2010.

From the data, the most noticeable figure was the rise in Indian certifications. Prorated for the whole year, they would represent an extra 8k.

Porting obviously has some thing to do with this, but it is not possible to say how much. Of course, the increased rate might not be sustained throughout the rest of the year. I therefore treat it as interesting rather than definitive.

[Spectator]

Spec,

This might be a basic qs for many, however, what does PD stand for? Priority Date / Porting Date?

It is Priority Date, or more correctly the date the application was Received by DOL.

I will change the description. Application Date was too long.

[Spectator]

Are these EB-2 #'s or consolidated figures for all EB categories.

They are for all EB categories.

There is no definitive means to distinguish EB2 from EB3 cases. You must make that judgement.

[qesehmk]

There are 6-7K cases that you are showing belong to 2011. That doesnt makse sense. How can decision date be in 2010 and PD in 2011?

NEVER MIND. I think you meant USCIS 2011 year. Right?

The Case No. Contains the Julian No of the Application Date.

eg A-10322-32895 shows the Application Date was the 322nd day of 2010 or 18/11/2010.

From the data, the most noticeable figure was the rise in Indian certifications. Prorated for the whole year, they would represent an extra 8k.

Porting obviously has some thing to do with this, but it is not possible to say how much. Of course, the increased rate might not be sustained throughout the rest of the year. I therefore treat it as interesting rather than definitive.

[Spectator]

There are 6-7K cases that you are showing belong to 2011. That doesnt makse sense. How can decision date be in 2010 and PD in 2011?

Because FY2011 started on October 01, 2010! All the Decisions are in FY2011. Therefore it is perfectly feasible for a Certification to have both been Received and Adjudicated in FY2011.

For example, case A-10322-32895 was Received by DOL on 11/18/2010, which is in FY2011. It was adjudicated on 12/01/2010 and therefore took 13 days to be approved.

[qesehmk]

Yes I realized that you meant USCIS FY after I posted that comment. Thanks.

I think the statistics you posted on approvals by FY is quite interesting. In Q1 2011 only 7K were approved. At full year that would mean 28K same year approvals. We can add 10K to it for any prior years plus the 18K already approved in Q1 2011. That brings full year PERM approvals in 2011 at 56K as opposed to 70K plus in 2010. That's full 20% reduction YoY in PERM approvals. So overall that's a good story. KD pls take a note. No need to worry.

Because FY2011 started on October 01, 2010! All the Decisions are in FY2011. Therefore it is perfectly feasible for a Certification to have both been Received and Adjudicated in FY2011.

For example, case A-10322-32895 was Received by DOL on 11/18/2010, which is in FY2011. It was adjudicated on 12/01/2010 and therefore took 13 days to be approved.

[kd2008]

Q, 20% is a good thing. But seriously I expect the drop to be more drastic then that.

[qesehmk]

So you are a convert now :-)

I think the best case scenario is a 40% drop.

Q, 20% is a good thing. But seriously I expect the drop to be more drastic then that.

[leo07]

if PERM drops by 40% and EB1 by 20% then we will be in Aug 2007?

[Spectator]

Yes I realized that you meant USCIS FY after I posted that comment. Thanks.

I think the statistics you posted on approvals by FY is quite interesting. In Q1 2011 only 7K were approved. At full year that would mean 28K same year approvals. We can add 10K to it for any prior years plus the 18K already approved in Q1 2011. That brings full year PERM approvals in 2011 at 56K as opposed to 70K plus in 2010. That's full 20% reduction YoY in PERM approvals. So overall that's a good story. KD pls take a note. No need to worry.

I don't entirely buy that logic.

Clearly, the beginning of FY2011 wasn't quite as Current as we thought, judging by the fact that nearly half the approvals related to the previous FY.

Full Year approvals are probably heading for slightly higher than 70k this year IMO - maybe.

Last year, around 75% of approvals in Q1 were for the previous FY year cases, compared to 49% this year.

That eventually turned round and 75% of the approvals in later quarters were for current FY submissions.

We only know how many current year PERMS were certified in Q1 - we don't know how many are pending because the previous year applications needed to be addressed.

Around 10-12% of cases approved appear to be appearing from Audit and Appeal - much the same as last year.

I think it is better to reserve judgement on the matter until we see what happens in the Q2 period.

If the Current Year approval numbers are still relatively low, then it probably says overall approvals will be low.

If they increase, as they did last year, then we might be heading for a similar number to last year.

[qesehmk]

This logic would make sense if 2010 were no extraordinary year. But 2010 was when PERM backlog was signficantly cleared. That clearance sale has been going right until now. It has to come to end sometime.

In Q1 2010 that sale clearly had barely begun and even if so they had prior years to approve before they approved 2010. That's what the % story is that you described. Ironically your facts are right but conclusion is (IMO) wrong.

Another way to verify my thesis is to look at PERM approval turn around. For 7K cases in 2011 the turnaround is less than 3 months!! Whereas it was much higher in 2010. Right. That tells you that backlog will continue to be cleared while new demand is trickling in (as opposed to flooding in).

I don't entirely buy that logic.

Clearly, the beginning of FY2011 wasn't quite as Current as we thought, judging by the fact that nearly half the approvals related to the previous FY.

Full Year approvals are probably heading for slightly higher than 70k this year IMO - maybe.

Last year, around 75% of approvals in Q1 were for the previous FY year cases, compared to 49% this year.

That eventually turned round and 75% of the approvals in later quarters were for current FY submissions.

We only know how many current year PERMS were certified in Q1 - we don't know how many are pending because the previous year applications needed to be addressed.

Around 10-12% of cases approved appear to be appearing from Audit and Appeal - much the same as last year.

I think it is better to reserve judgement on the matter until we see what happens in the Q2 period.

If the Current Year approval numbers are still relatively low, then it probably says overall approvals will be low.

If they increase, as they did last year, then we might be heading for a similar number to last year.

if PERM drops by 40% and EB1 by 20% then we will be in Aug 2007?

Yey!

[Spectator]

This logic would make sense if 2010 were no extraordinary year. But 2010 was when PERM backlog was signficantly cleared. That clearance sale has been going right until now. It has to come to end sometime.

In Q1 2010 that sale clearly had barely begun and even if so they had prior years to approve before they approved 2010. That's what the % story is that you described. Ironically your facts are right but conclusion is (IMO) wrong.

Another way to verify my thesis is to look at PERM approval turn around. For 7K cases in 2011 the turnaround is less than 3 months!! Whereas it was much higher in 2010. Right. That tells you that backlog will continue to be cleared while new demand is trickling in (as opposed to flooding in).

So please explain why 49% of approvals relate to FY2010.

That is a much higher figure than I would have expected, had the situation been as Current as we thought. It is only 25% less than a period when we knew there was a huge backlog to clear.

With such short PERM approval times, the numbers remaining from the previous FY should have been quite small and they weren't - unless you consider 49% to be a small number.

[bieber]

ever since the unemployment rate hit 10% and stayed little below there, companies and DOL started detailed queries (which makes complete sense, nothing wrong). eventhough last month report shows 9% it was because the total workforce went down and not because of new hirings.

Having said that, a well documented Real labor for EB2 has low chances of denial because the unemployment was not huge in such areas, EB3 ICRow may be in the same boat but that is not relevant for this dicussion

[qesehmk]

You see 2010 numbers because clearly DoL continues to work through the backlog and has not finished yet. (Of course the definition of backlog is not days but months and years worth inventory. Otherwise there will always be some backlog!).

So teh question is how does 49% look compared to 75% prior year? It certainly looks great since that's 33% reduction (not 25%). I think that's significant. Secondly the question is - is 33% good enough. I think the answer depends on when is one's individual PD!

Second proof of what I am saying is that the PERM turnaround time is shortened. All that matters is for new applications it is shortened. For old applications it may very well be high. But that's water under the bridge. The trend of backlog reduction is favorable. The trend of new app turnaround time is favorable. These two together indicate that PERM backlog is being worked through and new applications don't stay longer in the pool. If the pool was accumulating new applications then turn around times can't be where they are now.

49% is not a small number. But 3 months of turnaround (and in some cases as small as 4-5 days!) is a very small number. And that tells a big story.

So please explain why 49% of approvals relate to FY2010.

That is a much higher figure than I would have expected, had the situation been as Current as we thought. It is only 25% less than a period when we knew there was a huge backlog to clear.

With such short PERM approval times, the numbers remaining from the previous FY should have been quite small and they weren't - unless you consider 49% to be a small number.

[Spectator]

Out of interest, here is the Approval Profile for FY2010.

FY2010 - Total ---- %
Q1 ---- 11,798 -- 16.80%
Q2 ---- 23,156 -- 32.97%
Q3 ---- 20,169 -- 28.72%
Q4 ---- 15,114 -- 21.52%
Total - 70,237 - 100.00%

Interestingly, the lowest number of approvals were in Q1.

Contrast 11,798 in Q1 FY2010 with 18,355 in Q1 FY2011. I'm not saying it necessarily means anything.

I think we will just have to agree to disagree on what the Q1 figures say and wait for the Q2 figures.

[qesehmk]

This also quite well supports what I am trying to say.

First the firesale kicked off in Q2 (I have my own reasons why ...but that's besides the point) which is why Q1 approvals in 2010 were relatively less. In 2011 its opposite, most likely the firesale was in its last stage in Q1 2011 since we saw significant 2010 yet significant 2011 approvals with surprising levels of approval turn around.

Secondly as far as prior year goes since the sale had not yet started .... one would obviously expect more % approvals from prior year especially in Q1. Which is exactly what happened. What the approvals do not tell you is how much is still unapproved. That story can ONLY be inferred by turnaround time.

The turnaround reduction is as follows....(BASED ON Q1 2011 approvals).
FY Turnaround Time (For Decision) in Days
2008 875
2009 776
2010 121
2011 67

Out of interest, here is the Approval Profile for FY2010.

FY2010 - Total ---- %
Q1 ---- 11,798 -- 16.80%
Q2 ---- 23,156 -- 32.97%
Q3 ---- 20,169 -- 28.72%
Q4 ---- 15,114 -- 21.52%
Total - 70,237 - 100.00%

Interestingly, the lowest number of approvals were in Q1.

Contrast 11,798 in Q1 FY2010 with 18,355 in Q1 FY2011. I'm not saying it necessarily means anything.

I think we will just have to agree to disagree on what the Q1 figures say and wait for the Q2 figures.

[bieber]

Spec and Q

I don't know if it adds anything to your conversation, I checked the Q1 2010 approvals and none of the 11798 approvals had 2009 priority date forget about just Q1-2010.

This year atleast 33% approvals are from Q1 same fiscal

[bieber]

sorry i made a mistake, I just looked for Chicago not Atlanta, ignore my last post,

roughly there are about 5000 cases from 2009 that are approved in Q1 Fy2010

[veni001]

This also quite well supports what I am trying to say.

First the firesale kicked off in Q2 (I have my own reasons why ...but that's besides the point) which is why Q1 approvals in 2010 were relatively less. In 2011 its opposite, most likely the firesale was in its last stage in Q1 2011 since we saw significant 2010 yet significant 2011 approvals with surprising levels of approval turn around.

Secondly as far as prior year goes since the sale had not yet started .... one would obviously expect more % approvals from prior year especially in Q1. Which is exactly what happened. What the approvals do not tell you is how much is still unapproved. That story can ONLY be inferred by turnaround time.

The turnaround reduction is as follows....
FY Turnaround Time (For Decision) in Days
2008 875
2009 776
2010 121
2011 67

Q, Spec,
Can we guess how many EB2/EB3 based on PW wage level?
I see 2/3 of the certified cases are in wage Level1& Level 2, 1/3 of the certified cases in wage Level3&Level 4. I see the same trend in FY 2010 data!

Also FY 2011 Q1 ROW PERM approvals are about 21.5% when compared to total FY 2010 ROW PERM approval! I am not sure if this is going to have the same trending as FY 2010!