• 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.

CEAC data update

Some well respected members would say that Nepal is relatively disadvantaged in DV by having a lesser chance of being selected. I think being selected is just part of the story..
upload_2015-4-2_16-22-59.png
I personally don't complain about the system, nor do I blame any country for standing in the way of higher CNs.
 
Sensei-san said:
I think he meant to say that the quoted statement would be equally applicable to what happened with DV2014. And the article is just a confirmation of what he previously concluded on how that particular department operates.
Click to expand...
absolutely true.
Britsimon said:
This 2011 article discusses the failures with DV2012 - all of which have been explained thoroughly in this forum and none of which had anything to do with DV2014. But yeah, apart from it being old news, not making your point and not proving your theory - good job Sloner!
Click to expand...
At the time of the current review, CST management had neither provided OIG with an after-action report nor conducted a lessons learned analysis to share with CST staff or other stakeholders. CST was also unable to provide the OIG team with a plan for future implementation of the DV program. These documents are vital to the effective oversight and management of the DV program and will help avoid this and similar incidents, as well as their potentially costly consequences, in the future.

The Department of deceived people. But we are told that it takes care of them. Ah, ah, ah. Does not add up somehow. Lottery Department is not required. It's just an extra headache.
 
Last edited:
Sensei-san said:
Some well respected members would say that Nepal is relatively disadvantaged in DV by having a lesser chance of being selected. I think being selected is just part of the story..
View attachment 432
I personally don't complain about the system, nor do I blame any country for standing in the way of higher CNs.
Click to expand...
You can do the same calculations with Uzbekistan, Ukraine, Ghana. Where numbers are also cut off. Raevskii built an entire theory on deskriminatsii these countries.
 
Sloner said:
absolutely true.

At the time of the current review, CST management had neither provided OIG with an after-action report nor conducted a lessons learned analysis to share with CST staff or other stakeholders. CST was also unable to provide the OIG team with a plan for future implementation of the DV program. These documents are vital to the effective oversight and management of the DV program and will help avoid this and similar incidents, as well as their potentially costly consequences, in the future.

The Department of deceived people. But we are told that it takes care of them. Ah, ah, ah. Does not add up somehow. Lottery Department is not required. It's just an extra headache.
Click to expand...

But the premise says that 2014 was a mistake. It wasn't, clearly, because 2015 is a repeat!
 
Sensei-san said:
Some well respected members would say that Nepal is relatively disadvantaged in DV by having a lesser chance of being selected. I think being selected is just part of the story..
View attachment 432
I personally don't complain about the system, nor do I blame any country for standing in the way of higher CNs.
Click to expand...

Those numbers are the numbers including derivatives - the winning chance should be calculated on entries, not family.

What I have tried to make clear is that a Nepalese entrant has a lower chance of being selected (which is true), but yes once selected he/she will interview at one of the worlds most lenient embassies and the case number will mean he/she will go before most AS cases.

It's not a perfect system, but people from any country could do the same.
 
Sensei-san said:
Some well respected members would say that Nepal is relatively disadvantaged in DV by having a lesser chance of being selected. I think being selected is just part of the story..
View attachment 432
I personally don't complain about the system, nor do I blame any country for standing in the way of higher CNs.
Click to expand...

It seems Asian applicants are not as active on this forum as last year (self included).
Anyways, I hope we are not losing hope yet.

Here's what I found interesting by comparing the number of visa issued / family members we've "burnt" through (any status but at NVC)
Nepal is way ahead : we have 1892 visas issued /2386 burnt through (2014 Apr 2: 1456/1714)
Iran is : 592 / 1984 (2014 Apr 2: 629/2239)
ROA is way behind: 483/1135 (2014 Apr 2: 639/1079)

We know Nepal and Iran have 4991 and 4992 selectees this year, and 1000 each more last year. And I believe KCC is calculating the pace of VB progression by watching visa issued, then infer how many cases are required factoring in valid cases, response rate, interview show up rate and family composition.

If we assume all (or a equal number) of Nepal and Iran are within case number 9100, we can say the pace will pick up soon partly due to less Nepal cases and more Iran cases after 4300.

For easy explanation, let's say we have 100 cases, 40 Nepal , 40 Iran and 20 ROA.
In the 1st 50 cases, we see 30 Nepal , 15 Iran and 5 ROA,
In the next 50 cases, we can expect 10 Nepal , 25 Iran and 15 ROA

So, I expect the VB pace to pick up since: we have less Nepal density from 4300 to 9100, more Iran cases from 4300 ( but seems like a good portion of them will not clear AP in time). From what I've observed, this "front-loaded" distribution is more severe than last year, hence a more severe disconnect between Nepal vs. Iran & ROA.

By disconnect, I mean if KCC wants Nepal to close in max out in Aug, like 2014, the cut off would be 75xx to 85xx (to fulfill 33xx visas). This means the shortfall, due to this "front-loaded" distribution", must be made up in a single month, Sept.
I don't believe a single month would be sufficient, and I think KCC would want a back up month for easing in the last adjustments and clearing APs.

That leaves the alternative speculation - Asia will see a cut off around 7xxx-8xxx in July and shot up by 3-4000 CN in Aug with a specail cut off for Nepal while easing in Sept.Personally, I think ROA will go at least 12xxx unless Iran APs are clearing a lot faster. Knowing Iran is a bit behind on issue compared to last year Iran is : 592 / 1984 (2014 Apr 2: 629/2239), I doubt this would happen.

What do you think?
 
Anxiety2015 said:
It seems Asian applicants are not as active on this forum as last year (self included).
Anyways, I hope we are not losing hope yet.

Here's what I found interesting by comparing the number of visa issued / family members we've "burnt" through (any status but at NVC)
Nepal is way ahead : we have 1892 visas issued /2386 burnt through (2014 Apr 2: 1456/1714)
Iran is : 592 / 1984 (2014 Apr 2: 629/2239)
ROA is way behind: 483/1135 (2014 Apr 2: 639/1079)

We know Nepal and Iran have 4991 and 4992 selectees this year, and 1000 each more last year. And I believe KCC is calculating the pace of VB progression by watching visa issued, then infer how many cases are required factoring in valid cases, response rate, interview show up rate and family composition.

If we assume all (or a equal number) of Nepal and Iran are within case number 9100, we can say the pace will pick up soon partly due to less Nepal cases and more Iran cases after 4300.

For easy explanation, let's say we have 100 cases, 40 Nepal , 40 Iran and 20 ROA.
In the 1st 50 cases, we see 30 Nepal , 15 Iran and 5 ROA,
In the next 50 cases, we can expect 10 Nepal , 25 Iran and 15 ROA

So, I expect the VB pace to pick up since: we have less Nepal density from 4300 to 9100, more Iran cases from 4300 ( but seems like a good portion of them will not clear AP in time). From what I've observed, this "front-loaded" distribution is more severe than last year, hence a more severe disconnect between Nepal vs. Iran & ROA.

By disconnect, I mean if KCC wants Nepal to close in max out in Aug, like 2014, the cut off would be 75xx to 85xx (to fulfill 33xx visas). This means the shortfall, due to this "front-loaded" distribution", must be made up in a single month, Sept.
I don't believe a single month would be sufficient, and I think KCC would want a back up month for easing in the last adjustments and clearing APs.

That leaves the alternative speculation - Asia will see a cut off around 7xxx-8xxx in July and shot up by 3-4000 CN in Aug with a specail cut off for Nepal while easing in Sept.Personally, I think ROA will go at least 12xxx unless Iran APs are clearing a lot faster. Knowing Iran is a bit behind on issue compared to last year Iran is : 592 / 1984 (2014 Apr 2: 629/2239), I doubt this would happen.

What do you think?
Click to expand...

No - there are some problems with your assumptions. AS is really the easiest of the big 3 to figure out.

In 2014 Iran had 544k entries (family on top) and Nepal had 380K - so Iran had the lions share of the entries - and therefore their density was higher than Nepal. However, Iranian AP cases held them back (unlike 2013).

In 2015, Nepal had 545k entries and Iran had 499k. A big swing between the countries. That means Nepal has a higher density this year (which you had noticed but misinterpreted) and there is no reason to believe the Nepal density will drop before it is cutoff. Nepal has received 1892 in 4300 CNs - so that is 440 issued per thousand. That number will increase as some more cases under 4300 are interviewed or approved after AP - so we can assume Nepal will continue getting 440 per thousand and will hit the limit by 8000 (maybe as early as 7600 - which is 460 per 1000). That will most likely happen in the August VB thus allowing the ROA number to increase to around 9k or 10k in that month.

OK - so out of the 8500 quota, Nepal takes 3500 - that is a given. If Iranian AP impacts Iran the same as last year - perhaps Iran only gets 2000 to 2500 at most. So - that will leave 2500 to 2000 for ROA - and with those visas, ROA will go to 11XXX for sure, more likely 12XXX. 13XXX is a possibility, but an outside chance.
 
Thanks for your input Simon,

Here's what I don't understand.

I agree with you on the number of entries, but the number of selectees are fixed and published. For 2015, it's 4991 for Nepal and 4992 for Iran.
Wouldn't you think the number of selectees have a more direct impact on density, rather than entries?

After all, it's the selectees that make up the valid cases, not entries.

Based on a graph (http://britsimonsays.com/dv2015-analysis/) you've provided earlier this year, there's a significant drop at 8600-8800 and then 9100.
My assumption is most of the 4991 and 4992 selectees from Nepal and Iran will fall in this range (1-9100), maybe a few hundred will spread out until 19171.

Now, if we have "burnt through" 2386 selectees from Nepal, we only have 2605 to process. Most likely, we don't need all 2605 to fulfill 33xx visas (instead of 3500 including AOS that we don't see)
For Iran, we have "burnt through" 1984 selectees so far. Where would the rest go? probably between 4300 to 9100 will contain most of 3008 selectees.

Unless you are saying the proportion of Nepal selectees beyond 9100 is very small, and the proportion of Iran selectees beyond 9100 is very large, it does not make sense at all.
To make is clear, the number of selectees between 4300 to 9100 is fixed but unknown at the moment. Let's pick a number out of thin air, say 8000 for example.
Nepal will have 2605/8000 and Iran 3008 / 8000, the density of Iran is clearly higher. Again, for clarity sake, I am talking about density including family members since that's what KCC looks for. They don't necessarily care about cases, but the potential visa issued (i.e. including family).

At the end, I am trying to illustrate by allowing Nepal to go on it's natural pace until July and large increase must occur in Aug for ROA+Iran to fill the quota. That's what I mean by disconnect, a relatively fast pace of Nepal and a relatively slow pace by ROA+Iran. I will go further to say opening the flood gate as late as Sept seems highly unlikely.
 
Last edited:
Anxiety2015 said:
Thanks for your input Simon,

Here's what I don't understand.

I agree with you on the number of entries, but the number of selectees are fixed and published. For 2015, it's 4991 for Nepal and 4992 for Iran.
Wouldn't you think the number of selectees have a more direct impact on density, rather than entries?

After all, it's the selectees that make up the valid cases, not entries.

Based on a graph (http://britsimonsays.com/dv2015-analysis/) you've provided earlier this year, there's a significant drop at 8600-8800 and then 9100.
My assumption is most of the 4991 and 4992 selectees from Nepal and Iran will fall in this range, maybe a few hundred will spread out until 19171.

Now, if we have "burnt through" 2386 selectees from Nepal, we only have 2605 to process. Most likely, we don't need all 2605 to fulfill 33xx visas (instead of 3500 including AOS that we don't see)
For Iran, we have "burnt through" 1984 selectees so far. Where would the rest go? probably between 4300 to 9100 will contain most of 3008 selectees.

Unless you are saying the proportion of Nepal selectees beyond 9100 is very small, and the proportion of Iran selectees beyond 9100 is very large, it does not make sense at all.
To make is clear, the number of selectees between 4300 to 9100 is fixed but unknown at the moment. Let's pick a number out of thin air, say 8000 for example.
Nepal will have 2605/8000 and Iran 3008 / 8000, the density of Iran is clearly higher.

At the end, I am trying to illustrate by allowing Nepal to go on it's natural pace until July and large increase must occur in Aug for ROA+Iran to fill the quota. That's what I mean by disconnect, a relatively face pace of Nepal and a relatively slow pace by ROA+Iran. I will go further to say opening the flood gate as late as Sept seems highly unlikely.
Click to expand...

Density is a definition of how many CASES there are per thousand CNs. Not selectees. The density happens because of entries being selected - but of course the derivative rate means that the two countries don't have the same number of cases to reach their almost identical number of selectees. However, the entry data shows exactly what the derivative rate should be. Nepal has a derivative rate lower than Iran (1.61 versus 1.87). So - Nepal should have around 3051 cases, whilst Iran will have hit their limit at 2672 cases. There is NO reason to explain why cases for a country would be bunched within the first 4000 or second 4000 - the process is random selection, so the cases will be evenly distributed until exhausted (statistically speaking).

Now - within a region, all countries should have had an equal chance per entry - before disqualification.They have published the entries for 2014 and 2015 now so we can see EXACTLY what would have happened - no need for lousy guesses. There were just over 1564000 entries for Asia - so for every 1000 cases (before immediate disqualification) and we can calculate at what point the countries would have hit their selectee count. Cool - right!

So here goes...

Nepal had 35% of the entries so would have 35% of the cases, whilst Iran had 32% of the entries (and therefore 32% of winners).

So - disregarding fraud disqualifications Nepal would have got 350 cases per 1000 up to 3051 cases ( which means CN8710) and Iran would have had 320 cases per 1000 up to 2672 cases so would have hit that by CN8350. But wait - those numbers are too low - what happened??

Asia as a whole had 5% fraud disqualifications so they had to get an extra 5% on each of those numbers which would cut Nepal of at 9175 and Iran at 8789. If the fraud rate varied between those two countries there could be a small variation.

OK - that is all very clear, and it fits the charts I produced earlier - right? You might have the odd outlier after these numbers (there always seems to be some), but this is the way the draw happened.

Like I said - Asia is a doddle....
 
Kovalski said:
This is exactly the investigation I was talking about. It's from december last year.
Click to expand...

In that case, it's not the country I referred to before, which was Moldova. See, there is a pattern of the U.S. trying to stop scammers , but encouraging people not to report scammers works against that happening in your country ...
 
Britsimon said:
Density is a definition of how many CASES there are per thousand CNs. Not selectees. The density happens because of entries being selected - but of course the derivative rate means that the two countries don't have the same number of cases to reach their almost identical number of selectees. However, the entry data shows exactly what the derivative rate should be. Nepal has a derivative rate lower than Iran (1.61 versus 1.87). So - Nepal should have around 3051 cases, whilst Iran will have hit their limit at 2672 cases. There is NO reason to explain why cases for a country would be bunched within the first 4000 or second 4000 - the process is random selection, so the cases will be evenly distributed until exhausted (statistically speaking).

Now - within a region, all countries should have had an equal chance per entry - before disqualification.They have published the entries for 2014 and 2015 now so we can see EXACTLY what would have happened - no need for lousy guesses. There were just over 1564000 entries for Asia - so for every 1000 cases (before immediate disqualification) and we can calculate at what point the countries would have hit their selectee count. Cool - right!

So here goes...

Nepal had 35% of the entries so would have 35% of the cases, whilst Iran had 32% of the entries (and therefore 32% of winners).

So - disregarding fraud disqualifications Nepal would have got 350 cases per 1000 up to 3051 cases ( which means CN8710) and Iran would have had 320 cases per 1000 up to 2672 cases so would have hit that by CN8350. But wait - those numbers are too low - what happened??

Asia as a whole had 5% fraud disqualifications so they had to get an extra 5% on each of those numbers which would cut Nepal of at 9175 and Iran at 8789. If the fraud rate varied between those two countries there could be a small variation.

OK - that is all very clear, and it fits the charts I produced earlier - right? You might have the odd outlier after these numbers (there always seems to be some), but this is the way the draw happened.

Like I said - Asia is a doddle....
Click to expand...

Thanks for the explanation Simon.

Doddle it is, indeed. I wonder how many of us Asian selectees realized this doodle we are in. Maybe it's just me , lol.

As far as CN for Nepal goes, the 8900 of last year is like 76xx to 78xx in 2015 and 9500 of last year is like 8xxx in 2015.
Now the question is how many ROA and Iran visa issued can we expect by 76xx and 8xxx including AP clearing.

I wonder if KCC will introduce a special cut off for Nepal in July if Iran and ROA is too much behind?
 
Now this is not based on calculations or information or anything, it's just a feeling I have: I don't think KCC will like to leave the big Asia jump and a big portion of interviews until September. I mean last year (DV2014), most of the visas were issued by August and the September cutoff was not much increased (if it increased at all)...

Anyway maybe I'm wrong, only time will tell..
 
NaraLB said:
Now this is not based on calculations or information or anything, it's just a feeling I have: I don't think KCC will like to leave the big Asia jump and a big portion of interviews until September. I mean last year (DV2014), most of the visas were issued by August and the September cutoff was not much increased (if it increased at all)...


Anyway maybe I'm wrong, only time will tell..
Click to expand...

Right, and what I am trying to speculate is whether KCC will put a special cut off on Nepal in July instead of Aug if the case number is low enough for Nepal to max out around 7xxx and ROA and Iran is no where close to what's required to fill the quota.
 
NaraLB said:
Now this is not based on calculations or information or anything, it's just a feeling I have: I don't think KCC will like to leave the big Asia jump and a big portion of interviews until September. I mean last year (DV2014), most of the visas were issued by August and the September cutoff was not much increased (if it increased at all)...

Anyway maybe I'm wrong, only time will tell..
Click to expand...

Who said anything about a big proportion of the interviews being in September? Once Nepal and Iran are exhausted - the rest of Asia only have one third of the cases per thousand - so the jumps can be 3 times larger without having 3 times the interviews.
 
Anxiety2015 said:
Right, and what I am trying to speculate is whether KCC will put a special cut off on Nepal in July instead of Aug if the case number is low enough for Nepal to max out around 7xxx and ROA and Iran is no where close to what's required to fill the quota.
Click to expand...

I have predicted AS to be 58XX or 59XX for June. July could therefore be around 67XX to 69XX so one option would be to slow down Nepal spreading their progress over the last 3 or even 4 VBs - but I don't think they will. Time will tell.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top