2014 DV Australian winners

[Britsimon]

Great rundown of your interview Adrian! Glad it went well - congrats to you!

 

[Crawf33]

I've just got one question, and you touched on it in your post: do you think the financial thing won't matter too much? I'm not rich but I get by – I earn about $40k p.a. – and really don't have any savings, but I'm a working professional with a university degree

That you're a working professional with a university degree isn't going to mean squat if you're moving countries without a job lined up in advance. They definitely will ask you how you intend to support yourself until you get work, which is entirely reasonable...so the question is how DO you intend to support yourself? Without savings or a job already lined up (which believe me is tough to achieve from here), you might need a better plan than "mum and dad might save me if need be".

 

[4turya]

Congrats bro and we really wish you the best. Good luck

Alright, well now that I'm at the airport and I've had my share of celebratory beers (for now), here's a rundown of sorts. (Warning: This is long. Sorry - I'm a writer by trade.)

For background, I'm a 28-year-old guy from Brisbane who's been to the US six times since 2008 for vacations. This is the first time I've entered the DV lottery and my case number was somewhere between 300 and 310.

I did my medical and police checks in mid-August because I spent September and October on vacation in Colorado job-hunting. So by the time I got my interview date in mid-September I was all ready as far as paperwork was concerned.

I arrived in Sydney on Monday morning and had my new US-dimensions passport photo taken at Photoland on King and Pitt Streets, right by the theatre exit of the MLC Centre. It was $24.95 for two, but you only need the one. I had already tried the pharmacy inside MLC Centre (level 7, food court) but because Monday was Veterans Day in the US, whoever was in charge of the passport photos had taken the day off.

Monday night I had a few "take-the-edge-off" cocktails at Opera Bar in Sydney Harbour before heading back to my hotel (Travelodge Phillip St, literally three minutes' walk from the MLC Centre). When I checked in the guy had asked me what I was doing in town and I said I had an interview at Martin Place. He said "US consulate? We get a lot of guests for that sort of thing." so if you're an out-of-towner and looking for decent close accommodation for a reasonable price, I'd recommend it.

My interview was scheduled for 9:30am Tuesday morning but I'm a nervy bastard at the best of times so I decided to just go in early and see if I couldn't get through a bit ahead of schedule. On top of that I had a flight booked for 4:00pm and didn't want to get caught up if it went for a few hours. I hit the Martin Place post office first for the required 3kg express post envelope for the return of my passport.

I went to level 10 at the MLC Centre, showed my ID and went through the metal detector sans shoes, belt, sunnies and phone. They held the latter two but I was allowed to put my belt and shoes back on. After that I sat in a row of chairs until the elevator attendant called me and two others over. She hit the 59 button and we headed up to the consulate. Before the door there's an official behind a window who checks your passport again before buzzing the door to let you into the room. You press the button on the machine for Immigrant Visas, which will print you out a ticket with C-### on it, and then you take a seat.

Inside is just like your average Medicare or Department of Transport office, only probably more nerve-wracking. The magazines are crap and there's a pretty generic border-security video playing on the TV. Unless you take a book or the newspaper (DO THIS), you'll be bored. I probably sat for the best part of an hour before my number (C409) was called. I went to my assigned window and a woman went through my paperwork pretty painstakingly. I was nervous even though I knew it was all in order (grade 12 certificate, university transcripts, police report, medical records, birth certificate, passport). I took bank statements showing I had savings but she didn't even look at them before giving them back.

She gave me a ticket to show the cashier so I went to pay my fee ($US330 or $A363) - I took cash just in case the card machines were down, which they weren't. After seeing my receipt the woman at the window finished off my paperwork, had me sign the DS-230 (?) form and then asked me to sit down and wait.

When I sat down, AllyJane from this board came and sat next to me and introduced herself. We talked for a bit then she did a mad dash downstairs to get the visa mailing address out of her phone - remember to do that folks! Write it on a sheet of paper because you don't have your phone in the room - while I watched her stuff. Not long after she returned my number was called again and I did the interview proper.

The interviewing officer took my fingerprints, make me take an oath that I'd be truthful and answer questions to the best of my ability and then she got stuck into it. Why do you want to move to the US? What work do you do here? What work do you intend to do in the US? How will you support yourself while you look for work? Where will you stay? Why did you choose there? How do you know the person you're staying with?

Anyway after I answered her questions the interviewing officer looked at me with a deadpan expression and said "I have good news. You've been approved for the visa." She handed me a slip of paper with my name and some basic instructions on it and said congratulations. After that I said a quick seeya-later to AllyJane and took off back downstairs to grab my phone and sunnies and head out.

So that's it! From door to door it took me two hours. I was out by 10:25am with a green card on its way. Now I just have to wait until I get the passport back because I leave again on November 24. I know they say not to book anything until you get the visa in the mail, but buying a ticket last-minute wasn't viable and I packed up my life and quit my job in anticipation for today. Based on the testimony of other forum members who had Tuesday interviews, I'm expecting to get it back Friday in the post.

All I can say in advice is

a) Take something hard-copy to read. Seriously. The magazines suck.

b) Answer truthfully but don't go overboard. One woman who interviewed right before me was obviously nervous and babbled incessantly about unnecessary bullshit and from where I was sitting I could hear the consular official getting frustrated.

c) On that note, be prepared for everyone to hear every detail of your interview. The office is very open-plan and the consular official's microphone broadcasts every question through the glass and into everyone's ears. There's another good reason to keep your answers nice and simple.

d) Don't be nervous! You got this far. Be excited!

Hopefully this all helps somewhat. If you have any questions don't hesitate to ask!

Adrian

 

[emma_]

The staff at KCC don't know and if they did know they wouldn't say.

Yeah, that's what I would have thought- probably pointless even giving it a try!

I think Emma wanted to clarify the allocation and why they have selected so many in Oceania region.

Yep no matter though, I'll just be patient!

 

[emma_]

Adrian/crawf- congrats!! That is so exciting!! Whereabouts do you want to live? Thanks for the run down too

 

[Britsimon]

Wowww, congrats! Thanks so much for the rundown. You must feel amazing.

So funny to know that everyone can hear your interview. Definitely good to know lol.

I've just got one question, and you touched on it in your post: do you think the financial thing won't matter too much? I'm not rich but I get by – I earn about $40k p.a. – and really don't have any savings, but I'm a working professional with a university degree. I could probably get a letter from my parents saying they'd support me if need be – do you guys think this would be necessary?

Congrats again Crawf33 and ozmaddie. Good work!

That you're a working professional with a university degree isn't going to mean squat if you're moving countries without a job lined up in advance. They definitely will ask you how you intend to support yourself until you get work, which is entirely reasonable...so the question is how DO you intend to support yourself? Without savings or a job already lined up (which believe me is tough to achieve from here), you might need a better plan than "mum and dad might save me if need be".

I agree 100% with what crawf33 has said here. It is one thing to pass the visa interview and quite another to move over there and start off with hardly a penny to your name.

However, in terms of passing the interview, they don't always ask for financial proof and as crawf33 recounted when he presented his, the CO didn't even look at it. In other words she had already made up her mind that he would not become a public charge. That was almost certainly because he was well presented (first impressions do count), no doubt eloquent (judging by the essay he wrote here!) and he was armed with financial proof - so he had anticipated the question. So, whether his bank account showed $5000 or $50000 didn't really matter - he had given the CO the impression that he was not going to become a public charge - and that is all that is needed.

IF you can, you would be smart to have some money in your bank account to show on a statement - perhaps your parents will lend you that for a couple of months. Having that prepared might make you feel more ready for that question so that you are confident when you answer, if asked.

However, going back to what crawf33 said - you really should think about how you are actually going to support yourself...

 

[scorpz]

I agree 100% with what crawf33 has said here. It is one thing to pass the visa interview and quite another to move over there and start off with hardly a penny to your name.

However, in terms of passing the interview, they don't always ask for financial proof and as crawf33 recounted when he presented his, the CO didn't even look at it. In other words she had already made up her mind that he would not become a public charge. That was almost certainly because he was well presented (first impressions do count), no doubt eloquent (judging by the essay he wrote here!) and he was armed with financial proof - so he had anticipated the question. So, whether his bank account showed $5000 or $50000 didn't really matter - he had given the CO the impression that he was not going to become a public charge - and that is all that is needed.

IF you can, you would be smart to have some money in your bank account to show on a statement - perhaps your parents will lend you that for a couple of months. Having that prepared might make you feel more ready for that question so that you are confident when you answer, if asked.

However, going back to what crawf33 said - you really should think about how you are actually going to support yourself...

Thanks for the advice crawf33 and britsimon; appreciate the honesty. I guess it's something I hadn't had to think about until the possibility of the interview became so real! I'll have to come up with a plan to make sure I can prove my financial viability come the time of the interview. Already planning to sell my small amount of assets (car, etc) for this reason. Looks like I might have to take on extra work too. Whatever it takes!

 

[Britsimon]

Thanks for the advice crawf33 and britsimon; appreciate the honesty. I guess it's something I hadn't had to think about until the possibility of the interview became so real! I'll have to come up with a plan to make sure I can prove my financial viability come the time of the interview. Already planning to sell my small amount of assets (car, etc) for this reason. Looks like I might have to take on extra work too. Whatever it takes!

That sounds good. If you are young and single it can be easier to live on peanuts, but don't underestimate what it takes to get started in a new country. There are sites like www.helpx.net which let you arrange for accommodation and food in return for some of your available hours - that can be a good way to start. My son has used the site for UK arrangements.

 

[ozmaddie]

I've just got one question, and you touched on it in your post: do you think the financial thing won't matter too much? I'm not rich but I get by – I earn about $40k p.a. – and really don't have any savings, but I'm a working professional with a university degree. I could probably get a letter from my parents saying they'd support me if need be – do you guys think this would be necessary?

Hi scorpz, I agree with what has been said above by the others, however yesterday in my interview they did not ask for financial proof of being about to support myself. But I do actually have substantial savings even though she didn't ask for proof so I would make sure I do just incase you have to show them. It's all about honesty. My interview part went surprisingly quick (5 mins max.) I was getting quite nervous when I could see others before me going longer and some seemed to be waffling on a bit and getting a bit drilled. I just made sure I was straight to the point, quick and honest, I'm pretty sure they appreciate that seeing as they see so many people throughout the day. As for presentation I was just in jeans and tshirt so not dressed up by any means but dressed tidy of course! Hope this helps.

 

[scorpz]

That sounds good. If you are young and single it can be easier to live on peanuts, but don't underestimate what it takes to get started in a new country. There are sites like www.helpx.net which let you arrange for accommodation and food in return for some of your available hours - that can be a good way to start. My son has used the site for UK arrangements.

Thanks, britsimon. I've actually moved countries a couple of times in my life, but nothing quite as significant as this! Cheers for the link, will check it out for sure.

Hi scorpz, I agree with what has been said above by the others, however yesterday in my interview they did not ask for financial proof of being about to support myself. But I do actually have substantial savings even though she didn't ask for proof so I would make sure I do just incase you have to show them. It's all about honesty. My interview part went surprisingly quick (5 mins max.) I was getting quite nervous when I could see others before me going longer and some seemed to be waffling on a bit and getting a bit drilled. I just made sure I was straight to the point, quick and honest, I'm pretty sure they appreciate that seeing as they see so many people throughout the day. As for presentation I was just in jeans and tshirt so not dressed up by any means but dressed tidy of course! Hope this helps.

Thanks; I did have a bit of a read and it seems different countries approach the financial questions differently in the interview (have read of people overseas bringing affidavits of support to interviews, etc). But you're absolutely right – best to cover all bases and just do my best to have the money regardless of whether they ask me for proof of funds or not.

Overwhelmed by the helpfulness of these forums – you guys are great.

 

[CollingwoodRuck]

OC Vias numbers in 2013

Yes it is normal for the main bulk of the processing to happen after the first three bulletins. I was very disappointed to see such low numbers around the world. The December bulletin is the first one where there is feedback on how many people have turned up for interviews and how many got approved/denied, so in a sense it is the first one that gives a sense of what is going on. There are (of course) several theories being floated about why there was such bad progress. One possible theory is that the interest in going to the USA is higher this year than normal because the US economy is rebounding (this had a massive impact on the H1 process this year). Another is that the government shutdown caused a backlog in scheduling. The former theory is more scary in impact than the latter. Truth is - we don't know.

So to your underlying question.

Last year around 1700 OC visas were issued (with around 2000 selectees). This year they selected >4000 for OC which is a 100% increase when the global increase was only about 30%. I remain convinced that the 100% increase must mean they expect to allocate more to OC this year (i.e. increase the percentage of the global quota that is given to OC). So - I believe the end number for OC will be higher, and by some large margin. I would be surprised if it were less than 2500 perhaps as high as 3000.

The highest numbers in OC are risky as are the highest numbers in any region, however I think the cutoff for OC will be significantly higher than your number - probably somewhere in the 3000 - 4000 range.

Hi BritSimon

You seemed to have missed this post yesterday- with all the excitement over the successful interview reports!

First thanks for all the work you do patrolling these pages!
Just a clarification on the above if you please. You say that 1700 visas were issued last year (2013) in OC for the
2193 selectees.
That strikes me as very high; for example there tends to be a 30% drop off just from people who do not even send documents in to KCC.
And in 2012 (OK quirky year) there were 562 visas issued for 2001 selectees
And in 2011 there were 568 for the 1600.
Hence the 1700 seems pretty high.

Regards

 

[typo]

Some Oceania figures

OCEANIA DATA

	Number of selectees	Immigrant number use for visa issuances and adjustments of status	Last cutoff number before "CURRENT" showed	Month "CURRENT" showed	Percentage of selectees whose number was released before the month "CURRENT"	Selectees who had to wait until the month "CURRENT"
DV-2002	1,223	?	535	August	44%	688
DV-2003	1,200	675	615	August	51%	585
DV-2004	1,312	692	1000	August	76%	312
DV-2005	1,720	769	1275	September	74%	445
DV-2006	2,115	831	1115	September	53%	1000
DV-2007	1,398	541	1800	August	100%	0
DV-2008	1,713	710	1650	August	96%	63
DV-2009	1,801	605	930	July	52%	871
DV-2010	1,803	639	1300	August	72%	503
DV-2011	1,600	578	1400	August	88%	200
DV-2012*	2,001	562	1150	June	57%	851
DV-2013	2,193	?	1600	September	73%	593
DV-2014	4,215	?	?	?	?	?

* DV-2012 there was a redraw

REGIONAL ALLOCATIONS

	DV-2013		DV-2014
Africa	52,080	49.31%	61942	44.04%
Asia	16,045	15.19%	23270	16.54%
Europe	33,088	31.33%	46589	33.12%
North America	16	0.02%	23	0.02%
Oceania	2,193	2.08%	4215	3%
South America, Central America, and the Caribbean	2,206	2.09%	4620	3.28%
	105,628	100%	140659	100%

Hi guys
I've been reading this forum the last couple of weeks, all your sharing has been really helpful. It's great reading the stories of people getting their visas already too! I wanted to put together some data that may or may not prove helpful to anybody who thinks they have a high number. I can't really take that much from the data myself, a few people have already concluded that we're just going to have to wait, and I agree with them.
All I can see is that, like a lot people have pointed out, DV-2014 is very different due to the high number of selectees worldwide and the significant change in allocation to our region (they look at admission levels for the last five years and tweak regional allocations using a sort of formula, which I can paste a link to if people want). Total numbers of selectees worldwide has risen, but the share that went to Africa decreased, and the shares that went to Oceania, South America and North America rose.
The second last column of the first table shows how hard it would have been to predict the speed of the monthly bulletin based on the number of selectees in that year, it's too volatile.
The last column though shows that people with high numbers should definitely hold onto hope no matter what the monthly bulletin does over the coming months because there appears to be a lot of capacity for processing right at the very very end anyway, 2006 for example.
It's hard not to worry about it, and maybe I'm wrong, but I like to think that all of the above means that all 4215 of us are in with a shot and that slow bulletin numbers, if they happen, may not be the be-all and end-all.
Please let me know if you have any questions or spot anything to do with the data. You're all champs for posting here, thanks!

 

[emma_]

^ how on earth do they fit 1000 interviews into one month? (Re 2006)
Or even 5-600 for that matter?!

I guess that was one of my concerns- but obviously they do it somehow! Of course, not that many people would actually go through with the interview but it would still be a hefty chunk of people.

Thanks Typo!! It's great to have that info laid out

 

[Crawf33]

^ how on earth do they fit 1000 interviews into one month? (Re 2006)
Or even 5-600 for that matter?!

Keep in mind Emma that those 1,000 (or 600) are across the whole region, NOT just Australia. So you have processing in the pacific islands, New Zealand and the like.

On top of that, not every case number is going to pursue an interview anyway. Case numbers are assigned to the 125,000 who get selected for further processing...but that doesn't mean all of them are going to fill the paperwork on and go through with it all. So it's not like every single case from 300 to 350 (or whatever) all went yesterday.

 

[Britsimon]

Hi BritSimon

You seemed to have missed this post yesterday- with all the excitement over the successful interview reports!

First thanks for all the work you do patrolling these pages!
Just a clarification on the above if you please. You say that 1700 visas were issued last year (2013) in OC for the
2193 selectees.
That strikes me as very high; for example there tends to be a 30% drop off just from people who do not even send documents in to KCC.
And in 2012 (OK quirky year) there were 562 visas issued for 2001 selectees
And in 2011 there were 568 for the 1600.
Hence the 1700 seems pretty high.

Regards

Thanks for spotting my deliberate mistake to see if anyone was reading my posts!

You are quite correct - I think I took the 1700 from another post without thinking/checking. The number on the CEAC data including family is 624.

Apologies for the cock up.

 

[Britsimon]

OCEANIA DATA

	Number of selectees	Immigrant number use for visa issuances and adjustments of status	Last cutoff number before "CURRENT" showed	Month "CURRENT" showed	Percentage of selectees whose number was released before the month "CURRENT"	Selectees who had to wait until the month "CURRENT"
DV-2002	1,223	?	535	August	44%	688
DV-2003	1,200	675	615	August	51%	585
DV-2004	1,312	692	1000	August	76%	312
DV-2005	1,720	769	1275	September	74%	445
DV-2006	2,115	831	1115	September	53%	1000
DV-2007	1,398	541	1800	August	100%	0
DV-2008	1,713	710	1650	August	96%	63
DV-2009	1,801	605	930	July	52%	871
DV-2010	1,803	639	1300	August	72%	503
DV-2011	1,600	578	1400	August	88%	200
DV-2012*	2,001	562	1150	June	57%	851
DV-2013	2,193	?	1600	September	73%	593
DV-2014	4,215	?	?	?	?	?

* DV-2012 there was a redraw

REGIONAL ALLOCATIONS

	DV-2013		DV-2014
Africa	52,080	49.31%	61942	44.04%
Asia	16,045	15.19%	23270	16.54%
Europe	33,088	31.33%	46589	33.12%
North America	16	0.02%	23	0.02%
Oceania	2,193	2.08%	4215	3%
South America, Central America, and the Caribbean	2,206	2.09%	4620	3.28%
	105,628	100%	140659	100%

Hi guys
I've been reading this forum the last couple of weeks, all your sharing has been really helpful. It's great reading the stories of people getting their visas already too! I wanted to put together some data that may or may not prove helpful to anybody who thinks they have a high number. I can't really take that much from the data myself, a few people have already concluded that we're just going to have to wait, and I agree with them.
All I can see is that, like a lot people have pointed out, DV-2014 is very different due to the high number of selectees worldwide and the significant change in allocation to our region (they look at admission levels for the last five years and tweak regional allocations using a sort of formula, which I can paste a link to if people want). Total numbers of selectees worldwide has risen, but the share that went to Africa decreased, and the shares that went to Oceania, South America and North America rose.
The second last column of the first table shows how hard it would have been to predict the speed of the monthly bulletin based on the number of selectees in that year, it's too volatile.
The last column though shows that people with high numbers should definitely hold onto hope no matter what the monthly bulletin does over the coming months because there appears to be a lot of capacity for processing right at the very very end anyway, 2006 for example.
It's hard not to worry about it, and maybe I'm wrong, but I like to think that all of the above means that all 4215 of us are in with a shot and that slow bulletin numbers, if they happen, may not be the be-all and end-all.
Please let me know if you have any questions or spot anything to do with the data. You're all champs for posting here, thanks!

Excellent first post - welcome to the forum.

First of all please post the link about the allocations and the formula. That would be very helpful.

I agree that the selectee allocation has changed and that is (I believe) indicative of a change in the desired allocation. I just can't believe that there is no reason that OC for example has had a doubling of selectees while the global increase is around 30% more selectees this year. I do believe as you say that OC and SA will have more visas when the dust settles.

However, the problem is the global cutoff. There is a limit of 50k available visas and the increase in selectees this year means that there will be more than enough selectees. The limit will be hit so the conditions that allow USCIS to make a region CURRENT (i.e. that there are enough remaining visas to meet remaining demand) will probably not happen. KCC can influence how big a share a region gets by accelerating their regional cutoff in comparison to other regions however, if they don't do that, then it is likely that some or most of the regions will never go current.

However, your theory is as good as mine - and no one really knows, so as you also quite rightly said - the only thing we can do is wait.

By the way - are you a selectee for 2014?

 

[typo]

Keep in mind Emma that those 1,000 (or 600) are across the whole region, NOT just Australia. So you have processing in the pacific islands, New Zealand and the like.

On top of that, not every case number is going to pursue an interview anyway. Case numbers are assigned to the 125,000 who get selected for further processing...but that doesn't mean all of them are going to fill the paperwork on and go through with it all. So it's not like every single case from 300 to 350 (or whatever) all went yesterday.

Crawf is spot on. I guess we don't know if all selectees in 2006 that wanted an interview got one, I was wondering just that. This analysis isn't very strong, but the number of visa issuances / status adjustments as a percentage of selectees in that year is almost exactly what the average is for all years (39% and 41% respectively), so maybe that means that in fact there was no problem getting all people through that were pursuing interviews.

Following that and using another angle, a really really rough calc, and using some assumptions, might be;

47% of selectees went current in September 2006.
Assume visa issuances / AOS figure that year is the number of interviews that happened.
47% of visa issuances / AOS for that year is 391, so 391 interviews needed scheduling in September.
Assume there is one person, at one consulate, and interviewing solely for DV is their only duty.
22 working days, 7 operating hours a day.
=> 2.5 interviews an hour required, which means doable.

Once again, I could be really wrong with stuff, but I've had the same worries as other people thinking their numbers might be too high and that the visa bulletin is moving "slow", yet so far what all all the numbers seem to tell me is to just take a number and have a seat... wait... we already have numbers.

Thanks Britsimon. It's all from the horse's mouth, travel.state.gov. I tried posting this message yesterday but twice got a message saying it had to be reviewed by a moderator, which doesn't seem to have happened yet, so I'm trying posting without the links. You can find the most relevant page doing a Google search for "Diversity Visa Program Statistics", the reports are at the bottom. Reports on 2011–2014 selectee figures are linked to, pre-2011 reports are still on state.gov, but they're not linked to, you have to find them through search. The exact report title changes some years, but you can find them all on state.gov by doing another Google search for this string which I saw in all reports: "The following is the statistical breakdown by country of chargeability of those selected for the DV-20XX program", the links to state.gov are then listed.

The regional allocation adjustment formula is in legislation and is on the U.S. Government Printing Office site. Do a Google search for "§1153. Allocation of immigrant visas gpo.gov", should be the top hit, then do a find on the page for "Sec. 1153 - Allocation of immigrant visas PDF | Text | More". Open one of those then do a find on "diversity" to skip to the relevant section (c ) because it's long.

I didn't try to follow their reasoning for changing the regional allocations. But I also still don't think that the 35,000 increase in worldwide selectees is cause to worry because of what you find in this report on state.gov, which you can find directly by Google again "Table VII Immigrant Number Use for Visa Issuances and Adjustments of Status in the Diversity Immigrant Category Fiscal Years 2003-2012".

In that report is the following data:

	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012
Visa issuances / AOS	50,810	48,044	48,151	46,145	40,076	46,633	48,036	51,312	51,118	34,463

I haven't looked for DV-2013 data, not sure if it's out, and I'm speculating here, but if it's similar to DV-2012 then the 35,000 jump in selectees is a calculation to try and get 50,000 people (or 55,000 with that NACARA thing I haven't looked at) through again. Just opinion here, but knowing they've run the program since the early 90s I wouldn't imagine they'd now make a sudden shift in draw strategy that would make a disproportionate number of selectees not end up with interviews. Just speculation, and always trying to make things look like they work in my favour of course haha (I'm high 1000s).

 

[Britsimon]

Thanks for all that Typo. I guess (like Crawf33) you must be in the writing trade somehow...

Regarding 2012 and 2013 and whether they will be similar. The short answer is NO!

2012 was a major screwup. The draw was made with new software and soon after the May 1 results were announced it was realised that almost ALL the winners came from the first 4 days of the registration period. Someone had left a piece of test code in place for the live draw. So the did a rescinded all the previously announced results, did a redraw and announced those around mid/late June. So some people had checked on May 1, found they werent a winner and gave up - probably never heard about the redraw. Anyway - they strugglked to give the darn visas away - but by the end of the year they had only succeeded in reaching the 35k figure.

The 2013 results are not published yet. However, a clever fella who posts here ran a script to collect the DV2013 data from the CEAC system. You can see it here:-
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...VWWnJoV1BZSTF0R0JGeVRSTFE&usp=drive_web#gid=4

I don't think the data is quite complete but even the data that is there shows over 45k visas issued and of course AOS is on top of that. I think they made the 50k mark - i.e. back to normal.

The 35k selectees is a problem. There will be a cutoff somewhere in the top 20% of cases (globally). OC needs a greater allocation than it has got before (I think that is likely and I agree with your selectee split) but even with that I can't see the highest numbers being lucky. I also can't see the cutoff hitting below 2900/3000 mark - but things get a bit hairy after that.

Incidentally I have estimated the split in terms of visas issued in this thread. This estimation uses 2013 response/interview/success/denial rates to work out what the selectee splt you listed could translate to in terms of visas.

http://forums.immigration.com/showt...a-bulletin-December-2013-(Coming-Soon)/page12

Crawf is spot on. I guess we don't know if all selectees in 2006 that wanted an interview got one, I was wondering just that. This analysis isn't very strong, but the number of visa issuances / status adjustments as a percentage of selectees in that year is almost exactly what the average is for all years (39% and 41% respectively), so maybe that means that in fact there was no problem getting all people through that were pursuing interviews.

Following that and using another angle, a really really rough calc, and using some assumptions, might be;

47% of selectees went current in September 2006.
Assume visa issuances / AOS figure that year is the number of interviews that happened.
47% of visa issuances / AOS for that year is 391, so 391 interviews needed scheduling in September.
Assume there is one person, at one consulate, and interviewing solely for DV is their only duty.
22 working days, 7 operating hours a day.
=> 2.5 interviews an hour required, which means doable.

Once again, I could be really wrong with stuff, but I've had the same worries as other people thinking their numbers might be too high and that the visa bulletin is moving "slow", yet so far what all all the numbers seem to tell me is to just take a number and have a seat... wait... we already have numbers.

Thanks Britsimon. It's all from the horse's mouth, travel.state.gov. I tried posting this message yesterday but twice got a message saying it had to be reviewed by a moderator, which doesn't seem to have happened yet, so I'm trying posting without the links. You can find the most relevant page doing a Google search for "Diversity Visa Program Statistics", the reports are at the bottom. Reports on 2011–2014 selectee figures are linked to, pre-2011 reports are still on state.gov, but they're not linked to, you have to find them through search. The exact report title changes some years, but you can find them all on state.gov by doing another Google search for this string which I saw in all reports: "The following is the statistical breakdown by country of chargeability of those selected for the DV-20XX program", the links to state.gov are then listed.

The regional allocation adjustment formula is in legislation and is on the U.S. Government Printing Office site. Do a Google search for "§1153. Allocation of immigrant visas gpo.gov", should be the top hit, then do a find on the page for "Sec. 1153 - Allocation of immigrant visas PDF | Text | More". Open one of those then do a find on "diversity" to skip to the relevant section (c ) because it's long.

I didn't try to follow their reasoning for changing the regional allocations. But I also still don't think that the 35,000 increase in worldwide selectees is cause to worry because of what you find in this report on state.gov, which you can find directly by Google again "Table VII Immigrant Number Use for Visa Issuances and Adjustments of Status in the Diversity Immigrant Category Fiscal Years 2003-2012".

In that report is the following data:

	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012
Visa issuances / AOS	50,810	48,044	48,151	46,145	40,076	46,633	48,036	51,312	51,118	34,463

I haven't looked for DV-2013 data, not sure if it's out, and I'm speculating here, but if it's similar to DV-2012 then the 35,000 jump in selectees is a calculation to try and get 50,000 people (or 55,000 with that NACARA thing I haven't looked at) through again. Just opinion here, but knowing they've run the program since the early 90s I wouldn't imagine they'd now make a sudden shift in draw strategy that would make a disproportionate number of selectees not end up with interviews. Just speculation, and always trying to make things look like they work in my favour of course haha (I'm high 1000s).

 

[emma_]

Keep in mind Emma that those 1,000 (or 600) are across the whole region, NOT just Australia. So you have processing in the pacific islands, New Zealand and the like.

*facepalm* of course! sorry I can be incredibly dense sometimes!! Haha. I was forgetting it wasn't just Aus.

 

[emma_]

I have a question regarding study- it's a bit of a dilemma I'm in and would appreciate any advice!

I'm currently finishing off my undergraduate degree (arts, majoring in English Lit- apparently a lot of us are writer-type people!) - wonderful degree but let's face it, not entirely useful.
I am pursuing 2015 graduate entry medicine here in Australia, just maintaining my GPA and sat the GAMSAT (7 hr long med admissions test) in September. This is obviously my plan if I don't get an interview/green card in the DVL.
If I am miraculously successful at both, I will have an extremely difficult decision to make.

As I am still passionate about studying medicine, my other option is to take up PR in the US (provided I am successful at interview) and attempt to gain admission into medical school over there (which is decidedly more difficult.)

In considering this, my question is, is this even doable? As far as financially, I know permanent residents can get the same government and private loans as citizens, however coming off the back of winning the greencard lottery I feel like they would be reluctant to just hand me over thousands of dollars for a medical education (and understandably so.)
I asked a couple of American friends if they thought taking out student loans would consider you a 'public charge'- they didn't believe so at all and actually seemed quite confident that I could easily take out loans, given the hefty interest rates etc
In the USA, university loans also cover housing and food etc, so that is essentially how I would have to support myself, as fitting in a job between classes would be difficult (at least one with enough hours to fully support myself.)

Considering this last point, how do you think I should approach this with the US consulate, at my interview?
I find it very hard to believe they would like it if I said, say, "I have X dollars to support myself until I get into medical school, and then I plan to take out hefty loans to support myself."

I don't want to be dishonest though....

I don't know. What do you guys think?