• Hello Members, This forums is for DV lottery visas only. For other immigration related questions, please go to our forums home page, find the related forum and post it there.

Some interesting stats on disqualifications, verification etc

SusieQQQ

SusieQQQ

Well-Known Member
A few years old (2011) but no reason to expect much of this to have changed - the gist of the doc is the rant against how DV enables fraud, is a national security threat etc but the stats below interesting?
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CRPT-112hrpt275/html/CRPT-112hrpt275.htm

  • about 45 percent of the selectees fail to meet the minimum educational or work experience or training requirements, fail to supply the required medical information, or fail to complete the additional required paperwork either completely or on time
  • for the DV-2012 program out of 19.7m initial entries, 1.2m were immediately disqualified as duplicates by exact match photo screening. And another nearly 10% of the selectees were disqualified after secondary photo screening technology found they had submitted multiple applications.
  • Why some countries seem so susceptible to AP I guess: If an immigrant who files under numerous aliases is selected under one of those aliases, the alien must then support his visa application with fraudulent documents. ..``Identity fraud is endemic, and fraudulent documents are commonplace. Many countries exercise poor control over their vital records and identity documents, exacerbating the potential for program abuse. In some countries, this control is so poor that consular officers must assume that all travel, identity, and civil documents are unreliable.'' Consular officers at 6 posts reported that widespread use of fake documents, such and birth certificates, marriage certificates, and passports, presented challenges when verifying identities of applicants and dependents.''
  • The E-DV allows the State Department to look at every entry, run facial recognition on them, and share data with intelligence and law enforcement agencies. Further, the State Department contends that ``posts fairly routinely conducted investigations on bona fides of DV applicants,'' including verifying school certificates, employment, and claimed relationships.
  • the 2007 GAO report noted, ``At 5 of the 11 posts we reviewed, consular officers reported that the majority of DV applicants, lacking access to a computer or Internet savvy, use `visa agents' to enter the lottery. Some agents take advantage of DV applicants.
 
Pretty interesting. Didn't know the figure was that high for those selectees who fail to make it for requirements or documents; and didn't know there was that much fraud regarding duplicate entries.
 
Makes for interesting - and comforting - reading.

I think you might have mentioned Susie that they only tend to disquality / reject for material problems, not minor things (which is what many of us assume when we first begin this journey - that the slightest misstep means we're out). This certainly indicates that material issues are more likely to knock you out than a simple administrative oopsie.
 
Raevsky was able to gather the CEAC data for 2013 and posted the results on the Wikipedia page for the DV lottery. Firstly well done to Raevsky for doing that.
The CEAC data does not include all embassies and does not include people doing adjustment of status (which represents around 5% of cases). Nevertheless it can give an insight into this DV lottery to see why USCIS select so many "winners".

So putting the numbers into words....

Of the selectees only about 34% globally returned their 122/230 forms. The rest decided they did not want to continue the GC process for whatever reason.

Some people (around 4% of selectees) sent the forms in (so about 12% of the 34%) but never attended their interviews. That change of mind was most common in Europe.

Globally the refusal rate (people who attended interviews but were refused) is about 13% of the 34% that sent their forms in. However, most of those refusals (by far) were from the Africa region (21% of those that had interviews). Refusals for other regions were far lower (7% for EU and 6% for AS).

4% of cases globally remained in AP at the end of the year. That was twice as likely to happen in Asia or Africa compared to EU or OC.

In terms of visas issued, there were only 24221 selectees finally successful (meaning nearly 46,000 visas being issued including family members.

With the inclusion of Aos the non CEAC embassies I guess they were close to but under the 50k number at the end...

This year, there are just over 30% more winners selected, but with fall out rates as shown above that would only yield about 7/8k extra successful winners if there was no cap. The global cap will mean, as is widely accepted, that some people will miss out - and several regions may not go current (or the region might go current but interviews will either not be scheduled or will be cancelled after scheduling. August and September next year is going to be a nailbiting time for a lot of people http://forums.immigration.com/threads/putting-the-ceac-data-into-words.318353/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top