The differences between CSC and VSC NOA 2's

[Bayareaguy 156]

Looking back 2 years of data from VJ and USCIS, these are some observations:

"CSC is faster than VSC" or "They go back and forth being faster, it doesn't matter in the scheme of things"

Well, lets take a look.

(sorry, #u&!n@ Bill Gates wont let me put text labels for an xy plot, month 1 starts at December 2010 sequentially to month 27 February 2013, half month up to Feb 14. The VJ data I only looked at as far back as Feb 2011, which = month 3)

or for those that prefer a bar graph:

So for most of 2011, VSC is actually ahead of CSC, while in 2012, half of the months CSC is ahead of VSC, although April-june 2012 CSC is quite a bit higher than VSC (months 18-20), then VSC is quite a bit higher the rest of the time from September 2012 through today. So, in general, CSC is not faster than VSC. But, in the scheme of things, it does matter, looking at the data from October until today (month 23-27), CSC is in a rut. It is unprecedented in the last 2 years. Only one earlier month, sept 2011, had a low point near the present levels, and it did not sustain a low level for long.

"But, does VJ timeline data reflect the actual data from USCIS?"

Well, we can take a look at superimposing VJ data over USCIS data and see.

VSC data:

and CSC data:

Well, it looks pretty darn good. Looking at the actual numbers from USCIS data (right y axis), you can see that for VSC data, VJ represents about 7.5% of the actual case data, and CSC is roughly 7% of the actual data...that is a pretty good sample size of the population! Good job VJ!

So, if we agree that VJ data is a good representation of real data (and you don't need to agree, this is all up for debate and discussion after all, which is the reason for this post), then it is pretty clear that CSC is pretty slow these past few months, by just about anyone's definition.

Also, if we use the approximation that 1 person in USCIS can complete 15-20 I-129F cases a day, and VJ data is 7% the actual data, that means that since October 2012, only 1 employee (or the workload equivalent of 1 employee) has been working on CSC I-129F's (I assumed 20 working days in a month). Keep in mind, the average K1 cases processed a month is ~1850 at each service center, so in VJ numbers, that should be about 130 NOA2's a month average. That means we "should" be seeing about 4 NOA2's per calendar day. The number of NOA2's reported for CSC in the last 7 days? 1.

"CSC is slow because of the Dream Act/DACA/etc...."

Well, I don't know if this can really be definitively proved, or disproved. USCIS works on a lot of other visa applications besides K1 visas, much much higher in number than the K1's in fact. However, what has changed recently in visa applications? Well, in August 2012, USCIS began accepting DACA applications, and they began processing them in September, and in huge numbers beginning in October (month 23).

Lets overlay the USCIS data of approved DACA applications over the VJ CSC NOA data:

If we look at the numbers, at ~50,000 DACA applications approved/month, the amount of DACA applications approved per 1 1/2 days is about the same number of NOA 2's processed in an average month at either service center. And dont get too excited about the drop in February (month 27), it is only half the months data, so it will probably end up near 50,000 at the end of the month.

So, are CSC employees that would normally work on I-129F's, working on other applications instead?

[Flaxen 2]

Is there a possibility then that if they chunk away at the DACA's ... the I-129F's will get the attention again?

[Alex&Amy 28]

On average per month how many VJ users never actually update their timelines? What is the actual number of applications' received by both service centre's per each of those months?

[Bayareaguy 156]

On average per month how many VJ users never actually update their timelines?

What is the actual number of applications' received by both service centre's per each of those months?

Looking at Igors list, it looks like the NOA2's to NOA1's tops out around 85%. Some of those have not updated their profiles I'm sure. Some may have cancelled their petition. Some may have been denied as well. I assume the number of those are more or less consistent through time, so it would still be a valid comparison.

Looking at CSC, They average about 1880 NOA1's a month, compared to VJ data, which is about 125/month, so that is 6.6% of the USCIS data, again, close to the 7% seen for NOA2's. I did ignore the last few months of VJ data to get the average, as there is the affect of visa filers "discovering VJ" after filing their NOA1.

[moondream 36]

Looking at Igors list, it looks like the NOA2's to NOA1's tops out around 85%. Some of those have not updated their profiles I'm sure. Some may have cancelled their petition. Some may have been denied as well. I assume the number of those are more or less consistent through time, so it would still be a valid comparison.

Looking at CSC, They average about 1880 NOA1's a month, compared to VJ data, which is about 125/month, so that is 6.6% of the USCIS data, again, close to the 7% seen for NOA2's. I did ignore the last few months of VJ data to get the average, as there is the affect of visa filers "discovering VJ" after filing their NOA1.

I beleive California received like 4 times the amount of DACA applications than VT since they are more people in CA applying for it. I'd guess VT manage to digest the 100K of application they got while CSC is just in a middle of it cashing checks and entering applications.

[Bayareaguy 156]

I beleive California received like 4 times the amount of DACA applications than VT since they are more people in CA applying for it. I'd guess VT manage to digest the 100K of application they got while CSC is just in a middle of it cashing checks and entering applications.

I couldn't find any data on any breakdown of applicants to service center. For all we know, all of them are being processed in CSC...Have you found any service enter specific data?

I do find it interesting that they are very on top of putting out the data for DACA (they update every half month, you can even get the data up to Feb 15 now), while they only have updated through november for K1 data. I guess we can see who is important, and who is not.

[pachacuti 154]

I want to be part of a politically significant voting bloc

[Bayareaguy 156]

And for the record, I really don't care if DACA is or is not causing the slowdown in CSC I-129F processing. My point is, there is a slow down, and it isn't right. All the application types should be processed in a fair and even manner, and for what ever reason, we have been getting the shaft, with no end in sight.

When CSC VJ data starts showing a few NOA2's a day, then it will be hopeful. Until then, this pretty much sucks, other than for the few who are getting their NOA 2's in a timely manner.

[pachacuti 154]

I fully agree with you Bayareaguy. Not only am I sitting here waiting to be reunited with my love, but our son (another citizen BTW) is growing up without me. I am just glad that I am professionally and financially stable enough that I get to go visit them every 3 or 4 months. I feel really bad for those folks who don't have that luxury.

[-=Mai and Timmy=- 12]

hope soon were getting opur precious noa2 soon

[Bayareaguy 156]

I fully agree with you Bayareaguy. Not only am I sitting here waiting to be reunited with my love, but our son (another citizen BTW) is growing up without me. I am just glad that I am professionally and financially stable enough that I get to go visit them every 3 or 4 months. I feel really bad for those folks who don't have that luxury.

As a matter of fact, it's been almost exactly 1 year since I've seen my fiance and her children.

[pachacuti 154]

Sorry man. I was just down from 12/24 to 01/12. Plan is to go back in time for my son's first birthday in April It's not easy. I am just lucky that I work for a tech company that allows me to do a lot of remote work. Otherwise there is no way I could accumulate enough leave to keep going.

[Bayareaguy 156]

OK, there seems to be some confusion on how this data was arrived at, or that if this data even exists from USCIS (it does).

Also, I am not expecting anyone to take my word on this, if you are skeptical, I encourage you to look at the data yourself, and come to your own logical conclusion.

From the USCIS web page, the chart with their data (only updated to Nov 2012): http://dashboard.uscis.gov/index.cfm?formtype=6&office=2&charttype=1

it shows the national average, and the CSC data in a chart below (make sure to scroll down).

You can change the service center by the tabs, as well as form type (the link is for I-129F, CSC, which is one of the data sets I am using).

The raw data used to derive these charts (and what I used in my charts) is here (also is a link on the lower left corner of the graph, csv format): http://dashboard.uscis.gov/csvfiles/I-129-F_California-Service-Center_Trend-Chart.csv

The data is arranged per month, so it shows "Receipts" which is the NOA1 ("On xxxx xx, 20xx, we received this I129F PETITION FOR FIANCE(E)") and "completions" (NOA2) they have completed that month. Those completions are not the same petitions as the ones received in that month, they are only the data of each type processed in a given month.

The all other pending are the amount of petitions outstanding, that is receipts (NOA1) that are not completed yet (NOA2). The awaiting customer action are RFE's. That number seems high, and in fact doesn't jibe with VJ data, but there is an explanation for that: VJ users have been thoroughly prepped to send in a complete application. Do you think you may have recieved an RFE if you didn't use VJ (or another resource on the internet)?

Now for some reason, there are some on VJ who, unbelievably, don't acknowledge the existence of this data. They seem to have some kind of agenda to keep you uninformed. They also downplay the significance of VJ data. I really don't know what their intentions are...perhaps they don't want to have people see that CSC is slower than VSC, and has been since December. What ever their intentions are, it is very un-american, and I don't like it.

The data is there, you are free to use it...or not use it. Your choice.

And in fact, I am going to try to predict the USCIS NOA2 numbers that will occur for Dec-feb (later today, after I get back from the beach and have time to analyze the error between VJ and USCIS data).

Edited February 23, 2013 by Bayareaguy

[lost_at_sea 995]

OK, there seems to be some confusion on how this data was arrived at, or that if this data even exists from USCIS (it does).

Also, I am not expecting anyone to take my word on this, if you are skeptical, I encourage you to look at the data yourself, and come to your own logical conclusion.

From the USCIS web page, the chart with their data (only updated to Nov 2012): http://dashboard.uscis.gov/index.cfm?formtype=6&office=2&charttype=1

it shows the national average, and the CSC data in a chart below (make sure to scroll down).

You can change the service center by the tabs, as well as form type (the link is for I-129F, CSC, which is one of the data sets I am using).

The raw data used to derive these charts (and what I used in my charts) is here (also is a link on the lower left corner of the graph, csv format): http://dashboard.uscis.gov/csvfiles/I-129-F_California-Service-Center_Trend-Chart.csv

The data is arranged per month, so it shows "Receipts" which is the NOA1 ("On xxxx xx, 20xx, we received this I129F PETITION FOR FIANCE(E)") and "completions" (NOA2) they have completed that month. Those completions are not the same petitions as the ones received in that month, they are only the data of each type processed in a given month.

The all other pending are the amount of petitions outstanding, that is receipts (NOA1) that are not completed yet (NOA2). The awaiting customer action are RFE's. That number seems high, and in fact doesn't jibe with VJ data, but there is an explanation for that: VJ users have been thoroughly prepped to send in a complete application. Do you think you may have recieved an RFE if you didn't use VJ (or another resource on the internet)?

Now for some reason, there are some on VJ who, unbelievably, don't acknowledge the existence of this data. They seem to have some kind of agenda to keep you uninformed. They also downplay the significance of VJ data. I really don't know what their intentions are...perhaps they don't want to have people see that CSC is slower than VSC, and has been since December. What ever their intentions are, it is very un-american, and I don't like it.

The data is there, you are free to use it...or not use it. Your choice.

And in fact, I am going to try to predict the USCIS NOA2 numbers that will occur for Dec-feb (later today, after I get back from the beach and have time to analyze the error between VJ and USCIS data).

I feel the sane re: potential wilful misinterpretation or ignorance if the statistical analysis. I feel like there's a lot of FUD put out from the VJ forum, and I too am unsure of why. It almost feels like there's a service centre rivalry, or perhaps it's individual jealousy? Who knows. The data from USCIS is frustrating to follow. I look forward to your predictive analysis

I am a little surprised no one has written a script yet to pull out all the data out of the system using receipt numbers. Decrement or increment your receipt number provides someone else's statement... Of course, I don't particularly want them to pull down the checker (so don't actually do so), but folks are already doing it manually... Perhaps a pooling of people's manual lookups would provide a better coverage for the data.

[Bayareaguy 156]

I am a little surprised no one has written a script yet to pull out all the data out of the system using receipt numbers. Decrement or increment your receipt number provides someone else's statement... Of course, I don't particularly want them to pull down the checker (so don't actually do so), but folks are already doing it manually... Perhaps a pooling of people's manual lookups would provide a better coverage for the data.

Wow, I didn't realize that about the receipt numbers. I just checked a bunch before my number, and none had NOA2s.

Haha, a script is quite a bit beyond my capabilities, I just cut and paste columns on excel. I like the idea about populating a database. Then you would have a sample of the actual data instead of the self reported VJ data (which I still think is fine for seing the basic trends occurring).