Zipline

This is a very good article about the how the Obama administration is posing a dire threat to legal immigration processes as we know it. The PDF in the article has some very pointed information about DACA.

http://www.fairus.org/publications/president-obama-s-record-of-dismantling-immigration-enforcement

Video is much improved, great job!!!

I'm working on my own video as time permits.

Several December cases were approved yesterday (April 10). Not from VJ, but from the USCIS website (Case status). So for whatever reason, you early december filers seem to be in a sweet spot.

Where are you seeing this, Bayarea? Is this info somewhere on uscis.gov?

Waited 10 minutes for Tier 1...asked to be transferred to a Tier 2...then waited for another 45 minutes.

The second the ISO picked up the call, the first thing he said was, "I would like to inform you that during to high call volume, we will have to have an officer call you back in the next 48-72 hours."

Wow. I know this is the government and all ... but just ridiculous.

I think this will be a good video with the shortened text and revisions. Good job.

Not to be too much of a downer, but if they average the wait times then it would make sense that they would jump ahead and do a few random ones to make the overall wait time look less, so they look not as far away from their goals.

i.e. process 2 that are around 200 days, and 2 that are around 100, so it looks like the average is 150 days to wait.

I hope that's not the case.

I don't think the USCIS publishes the average wait time for a form type to be processed, not even for DACA. Unless these figures are available somewhere and I'm totally unaware of it. Perhaps the track it internally though.

Good job I&B. I've only had a time to quick look it over and enter my NOA1 date, but these seem to be pretty good projections.

Nice work, but I do see an issue with this part. The 10,929 is from Dec. 31, 2012. Really should be looking at the 11,898 from the end of Jan. For that matter you could conservatively estimate the backlog of Feb as 13000 and March as 14000. I think that is conservative because CSC hasn't improve the last 2 months and March has been the highest receipts the last 2 years. I realize you don't have a completion % for Feb & March, but using your average completions number, it would at least give a more up to date estimate for CSC to "clear" the backlog.

Good points. I wish the USCIS would publish their Feb and March data. I wrote the Ombudsman specifically yesterday asking when this data is going to be presented.

We use WhatsApp too, it is so much more reliable than Yahoo IM.

Miss her tons. Today is the 5-month NOA1 antiversary :,(

Great work. I've been working on something similar with the projections but I have largely been stumped on how to move forward. The problem is that, if you really get into the dashboard data, it doesn't add up.

Specifically, you would think that the number of apps pending in one month would be a simple function of how many apps were pending in the previous month plus the previous month's receipts and minus its completions. But that's not the case at all. There is a huge, inexplicable divergence in what that number of pending would be and the number actually reported. Over the two years of dashboard data I have, i calculate there is an average discrepancy of 1700 pending apps per month. I cannot explain it, and, since I cannot explain it, I cannot figure out the actual relationship between pending and completions from month to month and project a consistent estimate based on it.

I'd love to hear your thoughts on how you dealt with this. It drove me crazy all last weekend and I'm gearing up to have another go at the problem this weekend.

I noticed the disparity too. I'm not sure where it comes from. I think they probably have a goofy timing on when an app goes from Received to Pending. And maybe it also has something to do with the Awaiting Customer Action figure. You've also got me wondering if the proper Backlog number is really Last Month's Pending + Last Month's Receipts - Last Month's Completions. I may re-run the numbers with this and see what the effect is.

I decided to take my own statistical jab at the USCIS data, as others have. I think it was the worth the effort and I found some interesting things to highlight.

Since the K-1 process is already depressing enough, I will start with the most negative findings and work my way up to the positives (The Ugly, The Bad and The Good) and try to end on a positive note.

I decided to stick w/ raw numbers and not graphs. The one thing I find very bizarre is the volatility of the forms processed per month at both the CSC and VSC and I wanted to put some figures together to show just how bizarre it truly is.

Here are the 3 charts (I-129F CSC, I-129F VSC, and I-8219 DACA CSC), and below are my explanation of the the stats and my findings ...

csc.tiff

vsc.tiff

daca.tiff

Explanation of derived stats:

==========================

Pro-rated March 2013 for DACA ... Since only the first 14 days of March 2013 were available for DACA, I decided to pro-rate the data for the month of March rather than throw away the data. Reallize though that this March 2013 DACA

data is an approximation, not real numbers.

Column G - Backlog (number of forms). This one is simple. It is the previous month's Pending work carried forward to the first of the month. This is presented for the following month so we can show how much backlog (total work) there was to be worked on at the start of the month.

Column H - Current Month, Projected Completion (in months). This is the most telling figure, in my opinion. This column essentially says ... "Hypothetically, if no new forms at all were received from this month onward and the service center only worked what it had in it's backlog at the rate it worked this month how long would it take to finish the work?"

Column I - Average Rate, Projected Completion (in months). Similar to Column H, this column asks ... "Hypothetically, if no new forms at all were received from this month onward and the service center only worked what it had in it's backlog at the monthly rate it worked on average, how long would it take to finish the work?" For I-129F, the average is over the last two years Feb 2011-Jan 2013. For DACA it's Sept 2012-Mar 2013 (pro-rated).

Column J - Maximum Rate, Projected Completion (in months). Similar to Column H, this column asks ... "Hypothetically, if no new forms at all were received from this month onward and the service center only worked what it had in it's backlog at the highest monthly speed demonstrated, how long would it take to finish the work?" Again, for I-129F, the average is over the last two years Feb 2011-Jan 2013. For DACA it's Sept 2012-Mar 2013 (March prorated).

Column K - Versus Goal (in months). Shows how far ahead/behind the service center is of reaching it's National Service Goal, working at the speed it's working this month. Positive numbers indicate they will likely complete work ahead of time by X months on average, while negative numbers show they will likely complete work behind schedule by X months on average.

Column L - Ahead/Behind (number of forms). This stat is helpful because it shows whether the processing center gained (positive) or lost (negative) ground when looking at the forms finished during the month as compared to the forms received that month.

================

The Ugly:

================

DACA - This is wonderful news for DACA petitioners and very disconcerting news to us at CSC or VSC. According to the USCIS website, I-821D DACA has a 6 month National Service Goal. Yet, CSC seems to process its DACA forms at a 3 month rate (H25-H27 DACA, green) and a 2-month rate for March prorated (H28 DACA, blue)! Considering the enormous amount of DACA work, why are they finishing 2-3 times ahead of schedule?! What are they trying to prove by working so fast, when no one ever has waited anywhere close to 6 months for a DACA? This is a huge question to ask.

VSC - You will notice the backlog numbers are generally higher at the VSC and reached a maximum of 18,898 (G22 VSC, dark red). For folks who have sufferred at the VSC, we can see that, for whatever reason, historically VSC has carried a larger backlog than the CSC and that the VSC folks have paid the price with longer waits, up until Jan 2013 where they have probably turned a corner based partially on these Jan 2013 figures and what we've seen on VJ.

CSC - These numbers are really troubling. In this data (H25 and H26 CSC, red) we can see that the CSC was shockingly slow working K-1's in Dec 2012 and Jan 2013. If the CSC worked at its December 2012 pace indefinitely to finish it's K-1 backlog, it would take 20.11 months to finish the work. If the CSC worked at its January 2013 pace indefinitely to finish it's K-1 backlog, it would take 19.04 months to finish the work. Notice these figures are worse than any anemic single-month pace at the VSC (VSC's worst was 15.5 in July 2012). This is a worst case scenario, but it's conceivable many people would wait 15-20 months now from NOA1 to NOA2, four times the service goal, if CSC puts forth its worst effort indefinitely.

================

The Bad:

================

VSC - The VSC got way behind in May 2012-July 2012, falling more than 900 forms behind each month (L18-L20 VSC, light red)! It is really good thing the VSC turned things around in the last 4-6 months or they could have reached a 20k form backlog - easy.

CSC - Notice that in May 2011, CSC was working on a pace to complete it's backlog in 2.78 months (H6 CSC, salmon). And about the time that VSC was very bogged down, CSC was working on a completion pace of 3.34 and 2.99 in July 2012 and Aug 2012, respectively (H20-H21 CSC, purple). So why is this bad news? Because it warps expectations. We have probably all heard from friends "oh yeah, so-and-so went to through the CSC and it only took 3 months!" prior to filing a K-1 at CSC. This shows that, intentional or not, the USCIS are the ones manufacturing the drama with such wild variations in completion figures per month. The numbers show that if USCIS could just stabilitize and produce at a steady pace, they could easily do the work in 5 months instead of subjecting people to a 3 to 11 month crapshoot. Wouldn't you rather just wait the 5 months rather than risk waiting 9-11 months?!

The Good:

================

DACA - The USCIS did indeed get bombed with DACA forms from Sept 2012 - Nov 2012 (almost 100k per month), but receipts now seem to have stabilized at about 30k per month. The DACA work has lessened and should in theory be quite manageable now by the USCIS.

VSC - The good is certainly the 4,439 completion number from Jan 2013 (C26 VSC, purple). In that month they really worked ahead of the National Goal for the first time and cut out a huge chunk of backlog. We'll see what the Feb 2013 and March 2013 numbers say, but perhaps the VSC backlog is a thing of past and it's finally down to a 5-month waiting time, if not a little sooner.

CSC - The good news is that, as of Jan 2013, our backlog is really not that bad - 10,929 (G26 CSC, grey). If they turned around and started processing at an average rate they could be caught up in a little over 6 months (I26 CSC, blue). If they really attacked the problem at their previous monthly maximum, they could make sure every K-1 waiting any amount of time from today backward is served within 3.1 months (J26 CSC, brown)! This proves they don't have to move Heaven and Earth to serve us and solve the problem at CSC, they just simply need to increase output to what they've demonstrated before.

I have to be a little fair to the USCIS though and realize there are many kinds of USCIS forms out there and resources are constrained and there's bureacracy, inefficiency, etc. So a modest goal, would be to have CSC and VSC would be kicking out their K-1 Visas at a 5 month rate, following the National Service Goal and column K would be as close to zero as possible). After all, most of us probably saw the National Service Goal of 5 months and the other figures close to it when we filed at CSC. Longer than I would prefer to wait? Certainly, but it's what I got when I signed up.

Oscillating between 3,525 per month and 484 per month at CSC is just madness. If they want to keep people from going ape about the CSC for a few months and then things being super hunky dory in a few months, all they need to do is work at their maximum pace for a single month to weed out those waiting too long and then drop back to their average pace to serve at approximately 4-5 months from here on out.

How do we know this case involves DACA? Am I missing something?

Wow. I just dropped off my letter and visited with my senator's aide. He checked the website with me looking over his shoulder at 1130 CST and it was 6.6 months. I told him that less than a month ago it said 5.5 months and I tried to reinforce the point that it is the unchanging 5 month National goal which is what matters to me. He was thinking "maybe we shouldn't bother to call in until the 6.6 months hits", well now what? This gives fuel to argument that the CSC number doesn't mean much. If their missing their national standard on petitions the CSC should hear about it.

I may go in tomorrow quick and talk to the aide and show him the 7.5 months. The more I think about it, the California Service Center number should be a number of how long of a wait a brand new (or very recent petitioner, 2-4 weeks) can expect. Then I can buy the number ... but if you are in a situation like we are where the 5.5 months you signed up for magically turns into 6.6 and now 7.5 months and we are just supposed to sit tight and be quiet until the CSC SWAG time passes ... no sane person who loves their fiancee would stand aside and let this happen without taking notice.

Also notice it says "Effective as of: February 28, 2013" ... that's bull or at least a mistake! They just updated it today!

I thought about this a few weeks ago, but I'm skeptical. I think regardless of outcome the lawyer would end up w/ most of the money.

Thanks for posting. Seems that the numbers are pretty steady in that USCIS is processing about 50k a month and receiving about 30k new ones per month, now that the initial flood at the end of 2012 has passed.

I created a Tiny URL for this thread (the charts on the first page), a lot easier to give to elected officials in print ...

http://tinyurl.com/cscdata

Yes, the Ombudsman office did sepcificaly say resources were being shifted to work on the I-129F workload. They also used the current tense, not the past tense and not the future tense. I particulary bolded I-129F in my post because that was a specific detail. I could not forward the email itself. Feel free to send them an email yourself and let us know what response you get.

This is who sent me the email:

http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=478b58a734cd9210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCRD&vgnextchannel=478b58a734cd9210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCRD

The successful email you sent went the OLU Inquiries email address, right?

Does anyone know when the USCIS started processing K1 Visas? Was it ten, twenty, thirty, forty years ago? I was curious from a letter writing perspective and I couldn't find a conclusive answer on the Internet.

That's good to hear. We know exactly what the competing agency priorities are. I'll be writing the ombudsman too soon.

Thanks I was in complete shock today because it has been a very traumatic week for me. My mother passed away from cancer last Thursday and now this comes only five days later. It is hard to take it all in at once.

Congrats to finally getting approved, and my condolences to you and your family on the passing of your mother. My mom died of cancer 20 years ago, it's hard.

Here's the story I believe you are referring to ... <http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57469804/massive-veterans-affairs-backlog-leaves-half-a-million-waiting-for-benefits/>

Thank you for posting, it does show that we are not alone in having the government falling far short of its service level standards. At the end of the day, we are all left to contact officials and the media and fight for our own and others in our group, just as Aaron Helstrom in the video did.

This is a tricky story with the potential of being spun different ways by different people. There is certainly an angle for the conservatives there (illegals go ahead of US citizens) *but* they might take a dim view on anyone foreign coming in, either through DACA or the fiance visa process so their support, especially by someone as anti-immigrant as Limbaugh, can't be assumed. Likewise from the liberal side this could be colored as a monetary issue (conservatives refuse to fund DACA, citizens suffer) which would put conservatives in a bad light. I think the key to success is going to be coming up with a narrative targeted at each group of people pushing the buzzwords that group favors while making the other group look bad. I'll see about starting a thread later tonight to discuss the avenues for expressing frustration (letters to Congress, letters to the editor, blog posts and news releases) and how best to present the issue and deliver it. With the right sort of agitation we should be able to make this a big news story for both the right and the left!

You are right. We have to be a little delicate with the situation. I don't want a conservative who is going to put his foot in his mouth and misconstrue the situation in someway.

I will likely start with newspapers first. I have an in at the Omaha World-Herald as I had worked there as a web programmer for 5 years.

Just how big of a deal is this CSC slowdown currently? I've been out of the loop for a couple of months patiently waiting but if what I read is correct I am considering contacting my Congressman. However I don't want to go off half-cocked on hearsay information. I've known him for about 10 years and can contact him directly if I want but I don't want to go that route if it's not needed. However if there really is an issue affecting all of us and it's really going to be 10-12 months not the 5-6 I originally expected ((we applied the beginning of January and were expecting NOA2 by June-ish) then I think now is the time to act. I was thinking of contacting him and a couple other members of my Congressional delegation I don't know personally with the aim of creating a bit of a groundswell. Has anyone else done this? What about contacting the media? I would think this is the sort of thing certain parts of the media might jump on (USCIS puts illegals in line before US citizens) if they knew what was going on. However I don't want to yell "fire" if it's not warranted. As long as things are processing normally I'm ok with waiting but if nothing is happening then it's time to start seeing if we can push things along a bit.

I believe that this has potential as a national story. I want people to know about the injustice.

I'm not a staunch conservative, but can you imagine what Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh would say if they found out about this?

I may have something. I have a former co-worker and friend who works in video production. He has a baby son so he is kind of busy, but he is between jobs right now. He is also someone who appreciates activism as he was involved in OWS. I may reach out to him and see if he has a machine and good video editing tools to put something together. I will probably need to pay him, which is okay if we can work on the project together. I'll let you guys know if it's something that comes together.

I say we go gasther in front of CSC one day with signs.

I've been saving up all my vacation time to finally be with my fiancee. If this drags on into the summer with no NOA2, I can think of no better way to spend some of my vacation time flying to southern California and picketing somewhere visible near the CSC. I've got a friend in Riverside that will probably join us.