Diversity Immigrant Visa Information System (DVIS)

[AU.Dan]

Diversity Immigrant Visa Information System (DVIS) Privacy Impact Assessment

Here's a run down of the DV process. The first part has a basic description of the process.
You can get an idea on how each case is handled by the way DV computer systems works.

This document is dated September 1, 2009 but it seems to have more information in it.
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/103758.pdf

This document is dated September 14, 2011. There appears to be less information but it would be all up to date.
(I believe that this link appeared pervious thread about stats)
http://foia.state.gov/_docs/PIA/Diversity%20Visa%20Information%20System%20(DVIS).pdf

 

[CollingwoodRuck]

The second doco contains the statement:

'The number of visas a country can receive changes each year due to world events - the Visa Office (VO) sets the limits for each country.'

That is news to me - and probably to the author of the Wikipedia entry on DV who noted this happening but questioned if it could be legally sanctioned.

It also doesn't quite fit with this briefing given by an representative of Consular Affairs.

QUESTION: Consistently, from year to year, the number of people who receive the diversity visa from Azerbaijan has been about 300-something. And if you look at the statistics with neighbouring Armenia, their numbers are consistently over a thousand. So it does not correspond to the population or any other statistics that could explain that. So how is it actually determined?

MS. THURMOND: I would comment that it has to do with how many people enter. That’s the main reason why you’ll see more from one country than another, because it is completely random within the number of people who enter within any one region. However, if you’re seeing a lot more people selected from one country versus another in the same region, it’s likely that far more people entered from that other country.

Interesting.

 

[Sergey6116]

Interesting document. If you compare Armenia's Entry/Selection ratio to the other nearby countries you will obviously notice that The Department of State likes us Armenians lol.

 

[rafikbo76]

QUESTION: Consistently, from year to year, the number of people who receive the diversity visa from Azerbaijan has been about 300-something. And if you look at the statistics with neighbouring Armenia, their numbers are consistently over a thousand. So it does not correspond to the population or any other statistics that could explain that. So how is it actually determined?

MS. THURMOND: I would comment that it has to do with how many people enter. That’s the main reason why you’ll see more from one country than another, because it is completely random within the number of people who enter within any one region. However, if you’re seeing a lot more people selected from one country versus another in the same region, it’s likely that far more people entered from that other country.

Interesting.

That's the general rule (consequence) but in the same document, they talk about limit per country witch explain the example you mentioned about Armenia and Azera

"The number of visas a country can receive changes each year due to world events -
the Visa Office (VO) sets the limits for each country."

Also regional quota are determined by Law and differs from year to year

 

[Britsimon]

The second doco contains the statement:

'The number of visas a country can receive changes each year due to world events - the Visa Office (VO) sets the limits for each country.'

That is news to me - and probably to the author of the Wikipedia entry on DV who noted this happening but questioned if it could be legally sanctioned.

It also doesn't quite fit with this briefing given by an representative of Consular Affairs.

QUESTION: Consistently, from year to year, the number of people who receive the diversity visa from Azerbaijan has been about 300-something. And if you look at the statistics with neighbouring Armenia, their numbers are consistently over a thousand. So it does not correspond to the population or any other statistics that could explain that. So how is it actually determined?

MS. THURMOND: I would comment that it has to do with how many people enter. That’s the main reason why you’ll see more from one country than another, because it is completely random within the number of people who enter within any one region. However, if you’re seeing a lot more people selected from one country versus another in the same region, it’s likely that far more people entered from that other country.

Interesting.

I think I have linked to a couple of briefings. Both showed gaps in the knowledge of the people doing the briefing - and in reality this is more complicated than reporters wanted to hear.

The fact that some countries are limited is without doubt - and what Raevsky expressed in the Wiki was that he cannot find any law that supports that practice - hence the statement that the legality is questioned. A fundamental law controlling the process is that entrants within their own region have an equal chance of being selected - i.e. it is random. However that is obviously NOT the case for entrants from limited countries. Nigeria has had nearly 2 million selectees, so they should have had about 30/40k of the selectees - they don't - they only got the limited ~6k.

 

[raevsky]

The second doco contains the statement:

'The number of visas a country can receive changes each year due to world events - the Visa Office (VO) sets the limits for each country.'

That is news to me - and probably to the author of the Wikipedia entry on DV who noted this happening but questioned if it could be legally sanctioned.

It also doesn't quite fit with this briefing given by an representative of Consular Affairs.

QUESTION: Consistently, from year to year, the number of people who receive the diversity visa from Azerbaijan has been about 300-something. And if you look at the statistics with neighbouring Armenia, their numbers are consistently over a thousand. So it does not correspond to the population or any other statistics that could explain that. So how is it actually determined?

MS. THURMOND: I would comment that it has to do with how many people enter. That’s the main reason why you’ll see more from one country than another, because it is completely random within the number of people who enter within any one region. However, if you’re seeing a lot more people selected from one country versus another in the same region, it’s likely that far more people entered from that other country.

Interesting.

the number of visas per country is limited, and legality of this is not questionable. However, the number of winners per country is not officially qoutaed, and any caps on the amount of winners per country is an issue with questionable legality. Historically early lotteries did not have caps on the winners, and some countries (or country) had more than 50,000 winners

 

[rocky72]

The second doco contains the statement:
QUESTION: Consistently, from year to year, the number of people who receive the diversity visa from Azerbaijan has been about 300-something. And if you look at the statistics with neighbouring Armenia, their numbers are consistently over a thousand. So it does not correspond to the population or any other statistics that could explain that. So how is it actually determined?
Interesting.

that so-called journalist , if she had a bit of brain , should first study some principals DV-loto , then may be she won't ask such a stupid and shameful question.
that year armenians had 3 times more entries then azers , and as result 3 time more winners ...

 

[rocky72]

Interesting document. If you compare Armenia's Entry/Selection ratio to the other nearby countries you will obviously notice that The Department of State likes us Armenians lol.

more winners - more shame to country !
from good countries people do not try to get out and immigrate ... poor armenians , country with 3 mln people has 100K entries and 2,2K winners

so that stupid azerojurnalsit must feel pride , that they have 3 times less winners than armenians have

 

[CollingwoodRuck]

To make the DVIS work, you need the ‘congressional mandated algorithm’ - here it is.

“The bill divides the world into six regions and designates each a “high-admission” or “low-admission” region. High-admission regions are those that account for more than 1/6 of all family- and employer-sponsored visas and vice-versa for low-admission regions. The population of each region is calculated (excluding any “high-admission” country which has sent more than 50,000 migrants to the U.S. over the past five years), and the populations of all high- and low admission regions are added together separately. The population of each low-admission region is divided by the overall population of the low-admission regions, and the same is done for each high-admission region.

The DV Lottery allocates visas using the following formula:
For a low-admission region
(Regional population percentage) X (percentage of family- and employer sponsored visas that all high-admission regions account for)
For a high-admission region
(Regional population percentage) X (percentage of family- and employer sponsored visas that all low-admission regions account for)

As is evident from the formula, Schumer [US Senator from NY who set the formula] designed the DV Lottery formula to reflect changes in the levels and sources of immigration to the U.S. on an annual basis. The crux of the formula is that it allocates a percentage of visas to low-admission regions that is equal to the overall percentage of visas that high-admission regions account for in all other U.S. immigration programs. In order to ensure that the program does not benefit any single country disproportionately, no country can account for more than 7% of all Diversity Visas.”

Using DV2014 as the case study, shows how this works in practice - neglecting NA

The ’High’ regions populations:
AS 991m (86%)
SA 160m (14%)

The ’Low’:
AF 1100m (58%)
EU 751m (40 %)
OC 37m (1.97%)
These figures are estimates and would not match the exact ones used in DVIS – almost certainly the Bureau of Census annual figures. These change annually. [The accurate figures and annual changes are on the CIA web site – if you are into detailed analysis.]

All that is missing to complete the calculation is the single parameter that gives the percentage of sponsored visas from low admission regions. It does not seem to be publically available but it is trivial to calculate from the historic data. The definition allows it to move smoothly but it has been dead constant over the last four years – 0.81. That includes the 2012 episode. Indeed, if you exclude 2012, the factor stays exactly the same; but the standard deviation dramatically improves from 6% to 2%. So it is a pretty solid parameter. [You have to leave OC out of the fit; it is too small to impact.]

Given all that, the formula would, for DV2014, allocate visas to Regions as follows (first figure is total of 50k; second of 55k)

AF 23,644/26,008
AS 8,095/8,905
EU 16,156/17,771
SA 1,305/1,435
OC 801/881

Of course, these figures change annually. The first annual impact is from new additions/exclusions of countries. The second is from the differing growth rates among countries. (The change in ratios between AS/SA in 2014 is an example; Guatemala was added plus the population growths are different.) I have yet to find any secondary effects such as Country Caps impacting between regions –as opposed to within regions. Finally, the Bill allows swapping of quotas between regions if necessary; there is evidence of this happening – especially in the last quarter as Consulates’ capacities come under stress.

Finally, a mea culpa. Finding signals in lots of noisy data ain’t easy. Nat Silver’s book is essential encouragement! I had been badly diverted by the OC and SA selectees coming in exactly the same for 2012 and 2013; I now know that, though tantalisingly close [2,001 v 2,002!], this is just noise.I also now see that selectee/ allocation ratios are based on algorithms using historic take up rates –but at a Regional level. For example, for 2014 the selectee/allocation ratios appear to be
AF 2.4x
AS 2.6x
EU 2.6x
SA 3.2x
OC 5.2x
And on this basis, let me sign off for a month or so to head up the Rockies chasing avalanches.

Au revoir!

 

[Britsimon]

To make the DVIS work, you need the ‘congressional mandated algorithm’ - here it is.

“The bill divides the world into six regions and designates each a “high-admission” or “low-admission” region. High-admission regions are those that account for more than 1/6 of all family- and employer-sponsored visas and vice-versa for low-admission regions. The population of each region is calculated (excluding any “high-admission” country which has sent more than 50,000 migrants to the U.S. over the past five years), and the populations of all high- and low admission regions are added together separately. The population of each low-admission region is divided by the overall population of the low-admission regions, and the same is done for each high-admission region.

The DV Lottery allocates visas using the following formula:
For a low-admission region
(Regional population percentage) X (percentage of family- and employer sponsored visas that all high-admission regions account for)
For a high-admission region
(Regional population percentage) X (percentage of family- and employer sponsored visas that all low-admission regions account for)

As is evident from the formula, Schumer [US Senator from NY who set the formula] designed the DV Lottery formula to reflect changes in the levels and sources of immigration to the U.S. on an annual basis. The crux of the formula is that it allocates a percentage of visas to low-admission regions that is equal to the overall percentage of visas that high-admission regions account for in all other U.S. immigration programs. In order to ensure that the program does not benefit any single country disproportionately, no country can account for more than 7% of all Diversity Visas.”

Using DV2014 as the case study, shows how this works in practice - neglecting NA

The ’High’ regions populations:
AS 991m (86%)
SA 160m (14%)

The ’Low’:
AF 1100m (58%)
EU 751m (40 %)
OC 37m (1.97%)
These figures are estimates and would not match the exact ones used in DVIS – almost certainly the Bureau of Census annual figures. These change annually. [The accurate figures and annual changes are on the CIA web site – if you are into detailed analysis.]

All that is missing to complete the calculation is the single parameter that gives the percentage of sponsored visas from low admission regions. It does not seem to be publically available but it is trivial to calculate from the historic data. The definition allows it to move smoothly but it has been dead constant over the last four years – 0.81. That includes the 2012 episode. Indeed, if you exclude 2012, the factor stays exactly the same; but the standard deviation dramatically improves from 6% to 2%. So it is a pretty solid parameter. [You have to leave OC out of the fit; it is too small to impact.]

Given all that, the formula would, for DV2014, allocate visas to Regions as follows (first figure is total of 50k; second of 55k)

AF 23,644/26,008
AS 8,095/8,905
EU 16,156/17,771
SA 1,305/1,435
OC 801/881

Of course, these figures change annually. The first annual impact is from new additions/exclusions of countries. The second is from the differing growth rates among countries. (The change in ratios between AS/SA in 2014 is an example; Guatemala was added plus the population growths are different.) I have yet to find any secondary effects such as Country Caps impacting between regions –as opposed to within regions. Finally, the Bill allows swapping of quotas between regions if necessary; there is evidence of this happening – especially in the last quarter as Consulates’ capacities come under stress.

Finally, a mea culpa. Finding signals in lots of noisy data ain’t easy. Nat Silver’s book is essential encouragement! I had been badly diverted by the OC and SA selectees coming in exactly the same for 2012 and 2013; I now know that, though tantalisingly close [2,001 v 2,002!], this is just noise.I also now see that selectee/ allocation ratios are based on algorithms using historic take up rates –but at a Regional level. For example, for 2014 the selectee/allocation ratios appear to be
AF 2.4x
AS 2.6x
EU 2.6x
SA 3.2x
OC 5.2x
And on this basis, let me sign off for a month or so to head up the Rockies chasing avalanches.

Au revoir!

Holy cow! You obviously had a lot of time to put into this. Many, many thanks for such a detailed explanation. I'm sure I will come back to this over the coming months.

I'm wondering how firm these numbers are however because in DV2013 AS region received 9480 visas out of 51k globally. So, according to your calculation, they must be content to let the regions exceed the quotas?? - I know there is something about unused visas being passed to another region BUT I thought only the low admission regions could benefit from that.

http://travel.state.gov/content/dam...013AnnualReport/FY13AnnualReport-TableVII.pdf

Have fun with the avalanches!