Field office processing date and priority

[watashi 24]

The USCIS website provides information on processing dates of N400s at various field offices: https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/processTimesDisplayInit.do . 

 

I'd like to ask - what exactly does the processing date mean ? For the choices here, I'll define oldest and youngest as their priority dates (PD):

a) the youngest N400 application assigned to that field office is that old. This application HAS cleared all background check but has not been assigned an interview date.

b) the youngest N400 application assigned to that field office is that old. This application HAS NOT cleared background check and has not been assigned an interview date. 

c) the oldest N400 application assigned to that field office is that old. This application HAS cleared all background check but has not been assigned an interview date. 

d) the oldest N400 application assigned to that field office is that old. This application HAS NOT cleared background check and has not been assigned an interview date. 

e) some other ? 

 

My understanding is that the processing date for FOs/DOs is option (c) . This is based on my understanding of the process, which is that there are three sets of priority queues - for FP, for interview and post-interview : 

 

Step 1: Applicant assigned PD, queued for FP based on PD. Optionally, applicant may break queue using walk-in and accelerate their next step. This

Step 2: Background and name check (BC/NC) initiated. This is of non-deterministic duration. The plan seems to be that "98% of applicants cleared within 1 month, remaining 2% within 6-12 months". This is a description I saw someplace, but don't have a reference to it. 

Step 3: Upon conclusion of background and name check, the application is send to FO/DO, where it enters a priority-based queue. This is a queue of applicants who have cleared BC/NC but NOT yet assigned an interview date. Insertions into this queue are not in temporal order, since it depends on BC/NC completion. The oldest PD in this queue is what gets reported monthly as the FO processing date. 

 

Note: this doesn't mean that there are no older applicants for that FO. It means that the processing date is the oldest applicant for that FO whose BC/NC has cleared, but who hasn't yet obtained an interview date. You don't get an interview until BC/NC is cleared and you satisfy timing constraints, e.g. in case of 90-day advance applicants.  

 

Step 4: New BC/NC can enter this priority queue at any time. A very old PD applicant who clears BC/NC can immediately go to the front of the queue since their PD may be older than the oldest person currently on it, so they get first priority for interview dates. 

Step 5: Interview date assigned. At this point the applicant leaves the priority queue. They may re-enter a separate priority queue post interview if their circumstances have changed (e.g. foreign travel) triggering further BC/NC, but in general this should be the most forgiving queue, since this is the final step where they're trying to accommodate your timing needs, combining applicants from same family etc. 

 

Any feedback or comments welcome. 

[watashi 24]

Here's the (somewhat dated) reference to the goal regarding completing background checks:

https://www.uscis.gov/archive/archive-news/uscis-fbi-eliminate-national-name-check-backlog

"The final goal of the business plan was to achieve a sustainable performance level by the NNCP of completing 98 percent of name check requests submitted by USCIS within 30 days, and the remaining two percent within 90 days.  This performance level will become the new standard. "

 

From anecdotal information here, they're not yet accomplishing this exactly, but a large number of people seem to go from biometrics to queued for interview within the listed timeframes. 

[syrialord 9]

4 hours ago, watashi said:

Here's the (somewhat dated) reference to the goal regarding completing background checks:

https://www.uscis.gov/archive/archive-news/uscis-fbi-eliminate-national-name-check-backlog

"The final goal of the business plan was to achieve a sustainable performance level by the NNCP of completing 98 percent of name check requests submitted by USCIS within 30 days, and the remaining two percent within 90 days.  This performance level will become the new standard. "

 

From anecdotal information here, they're not yet accomplishing this exactly, but a large number of people seem to go from biometrics to queued for interview within the listed timeframes. 

I don't think that is the case anymore. I have did my finger prints almost 5 months now and when I inquired about my status couple of weeks ago I was told that my background check has not cleared yet  

[watashi 24]

I don't think they ever achieved the goal. But the purpose of this thread is to construct what might be a sequence of steps. In particular, I wanted to understand what precisely does 'processing date' for a given field office mean.

 

As I described earlier, I think it means the oldest application that's back from BC/NC, but which is yet to get an interview date. It may still mean more older applications may be outstanding in BC/NC, but when they get back, they go to the head of the queue waiting for interview spots. 

[watashi 24]

Here's a document for GC applicants that UCCIS/DHS just released, with information pertinent to N400s as well, since it is the same 'processing times' website (https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/processTimesDisplayInit.do) . 

 

USCIS Has Unclear Website Information and Unrealistic Time Goals for Adjudicating Green Card Applications

 

Specifically: 

Quote

Visitors to the site might assume that as of June 30, 2017, the St. Louis, Missouri field office (St. Louis) was adjudicating green card applications received on or after August 13, 2016. However, this published calendar date has nothing to do with the actual receipt date of the applications immigration services officers (ISO) were adjudicating at that time; nor does it reflect how long it was taking to adjudicate applications. Instead, every month, USCIS determines the number of applications pending adjudication in each field office and uses this number to calculate a calendar date.5 USCIS uses the calculated calendar date to represent the age of the applications being processed by each field office and then reports that a field office is processing cases as of this calculated date.

The pending applications do not include applications the field office is unable to actively work on. For example, if USCIS is waiting for an applicant to provide additional information, the application is not included in the calculation.

Quote

 

Two other factors may lead to confusion about green card application processing information on the USCIS website. First, because it takes time to collect internal data, when the calculated date is reported on the website it is already 6 weeks out of date. Second, because USCIS’ calculated calendar date depends on pending applications, if the number of pending applications rises suddenly the calculated date on the USCIS website may move backward in time. This apparent lengthening in processing time may make a field office appear inefficient when the reality may be quite different. For example, on September 22, 2016, the USCIS website showed the Reno, Nevada field office (Reno) as having slow processing times, which Senator McCaskill interpreted as inefficiency. In actuality, Reno was completing applications more quickly than the national average. Because of this, USCIS shifted applications from other field offices to Reno, causing Reno’s published website processing time to spike. Even though Reno continued to complete applications quickly, the USCIS website showed a sharp increase in expected wait times starting in FY 2015. For example, in FY 2016, even though Reno actually completed applications requiring interviews in 184 days on average, the USCIS website showed Reno taking 518 days to complete applications.

 

Edited March 16, 2018 by watashi

[watashi 24]

For all of us who want to know 'what does the processing time even mean', the above is very revealing. 

 

Further down, in the USCIS response to the report, it states: 

In March 2018, USCIS will launch a redesigned processing times webpage. which will include a pilot that introduces new methodology

 

We are right at that point of time now, so it is worth seeing if there's a change in N400 processing times at field offices too, due to the same change. 

Edited March 16, 2018 by watashi

[watashi 24]

There's an older USCIS report from Jan 2017 also describing what the existing processing time methodology looks like: 

USCIS Announces a New Approach to Posting Processing Times  

 

The methodology for calculating processing times, however, has not changed.  USCIS continues to calculate processing times, also referred to as “cycle times,” using the number of cases pending with the responsible USCIS office or service center against cases completed in that month.  The calculated processing time provides an estimate of the elapsed time associated with specific types of cases (e.g., Form N-400, Application for Naturalization or Form I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status) that are pending with USCIS.  There generally is a 45-day lag between the processing time information and when it is posted to the USCIS website.  As a result, customers do not have the benefit of real-time adjudications data.  Additionally, processing times do not take into account when Requests for Evidence or Notices of Intent to Deny are issued, which can add weeks or months to a case’s processing time.

 

While this change to the format will make it easier for USCIS customers to understand processing times, more needs to be done.  Processing times should use real-time data that accurately reflect the time it takes USCIS to perform adjudications, as well as the number or percentage of applications/petitions that fall outside the posted processing time.  More accurate processing times will go a long way to setting realistic expectations for individuals and employers, and measuring the agency’s success in meeting stated processing goals.

Basically, at least from Jan 2017, they reported processing times in specific dates. The way they calculate it is explained above. 

 

The bottomline though, is that 'processing date' has no direct relation to one's own priority date. 

[watashi 24]

USCIS has revamped the processing time site on schedule!!

 

https://egov.uscis.gov/processing-times/#mainContent

[Dashinka 24,579]

I kind of lost track of what processing times mean after my wife filed the ROC and it entered the black hole of CSC..  Then she filed the N400 in January 2018 and we sat back figuring on an 8-10 month wait.  Low and behold, the Detroit office (which the link in the OP shows as being a 9 - 14.5 month wait for the N400) set her up for an interview less than three months after filing (biometrics completed in early February).  One wonders, was she just lucky, did she have a straightforward background check, or did he application land on the desk of an IO that is very efficient.

[HOUNOV2017 7]

8 hours ago, watashi said:

USCIS has revamped the processing time site on schedule!!

 

https://egov.uscis.gov/processing-times/#mainContent

Hello Watashi,

You look very resourceful and I'd like to pick your brain about couple things.

 

I am a paper Nov 2017 filer, my paper packet got ELIS-scanned and uploaded by ELIS to the old ELIS site (IOE receipt). All my files are accessible/ downloadable through old ELIS system but only 2 of them are showing in the new myaccount site and not accessible. This experience has been common among a lot of paper filers between the 2 sites. I know you are an online, Dec 2017, IOE receipt filer, Do you have access to your scanned self-uploaded documents in the old ELIS site and the new myaccount site?   or are you receiving "file not found" errors in myaccount site?

 

At certain recent point paper filers started getting IOE receipt numbers and paper packet got ELIS scanned/ ELIS-uploaded to old ELIS site. Do you think this pool of filers will be the same as native online filers?

 

I am sure you are aware of interview requests for Jan 2018 online filers in multiple FO's. In your opinion or analysis, what are the factors that will provide priority for online cases faster processing beside Back ground check completion?   

 

Thanks.

 

[watashi 24]

I don't have any problems with accessing documents on either side. I only uploaded supporting documents on myaccount , and they're only available there, not on the older ELIS. But both have the full N400 application form . 

 

Recent OIG (Office of Inspector General) feedback castigates USCIS for slow processing and overall high average processing time. Therefore I think it is to be expected that they will attempt to demonstrate faster processing times. After all their benchmark for N400s is 5 month processing time - seemingly wildly optimistic for so many here. 

 

For those who care, I recommend reading the Nov 2017 OIG Report: 

https://www.oig.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/assets/2017-12/OIG-18-23-Nov17.pdf

It's not happy and positive reading, but it covers many issues visible here as anecdotes :

* Paper filer delays, because among other things the new system cannot scan papers easily, or print stuff easily.

* Cant batch print naturalization certificate 

* Unintuitive interface leading to 2x slowdown in N400 processing systemwide. 

* Poor timing of transition, right in the middle of a period where filings increased dramatically in volume

* Pressure to show results quickly, leading to trying to process trivial cases quickly to show better throughput. 

 

As an online 5year filer without a very complex application, from a FO with a 9-12 month timeline, it's not too bad for me. But Dallas/Houston filers have it a lot worse. 

[DanAl 11]

On 3/22/2018 at 1:11 AM, watashi said:

USCIS has revamped the processing time site on schedule!!

 

https://egov.uscis.gov/processing-times/#mainContent

They state that the lower end of the "new" estimate is the time to process 50% (median) of the cases and the top is 93%.

It would have been great if there was information to other percentile points..... 

Also, they state they cannot predict processing time (makes sense) and that their estimates are based on historical data. I wonder when is this data from and whether it includes the surge in number of applications in the last year and a half. If the data is based on a period which includes slower times then this estimate will probably be much faster than the current reality.

[watashi 24]

Post #5 has an OIG report mainly talking about green card processing, but it covers processing time calculations, and applies just as much to N400 applicants. I've also quoted relevant sections of the document.

 

Technically, the processing time formula uses number of applications received in a month, number adjudicated and current backlog. Basic queueing rate calculations don't quite work because the queue isn't first in first out. But... the difference between 50% applications time and 93% applications time is an indicator of the likelihood that a given application might be done much faster. The shorter the gap, the more efficient the place. 

 

Here's why I think so. Let's take my FO Sacramento. It's time range is 9.5-13 months. That means 50% of applications take 9.5 months, but 93% are done within just another 4 months. This suggests that their primary problem is that there's an accumulated backlog that new applications are stuck behind, but once they get to it, processing rate is fast. On the other hand, take some other FO where the range is 12-24 months. That FO has a very different problem on its hands. Half the applicants can assume 12 month completion, but the other half can expect twice as long ? 

[watashi 24]

USCIS has released new field office-wise quarterly processing data today: 

 

USCIS N400 Processing data for quarter ended Dec 2017

 

For California watchers, SoCal FOs are showing good performance on their approved vs received figures. NorCal is a mixed bag. Sac FO is doing very well, but SF/SJ are still accumulating a larger backlog. 

 

For Texas filers, both Dallas and Houston FOs are reporting approval figures less than half that of the number of applications received in the quarter, which doesn't speak well for their backlogs.