DORA, Excerpts from 2006 Ombudsman Report

anti-climacus

Registered Users (C)
Full text, http://boards.immigration.com/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=39

From its inception in the first week of May 2004 through February 3, 2006, DORA scheduled 23,570 appointments, of which 5,196 (22 percent) were no-shows.83 DORA rejected 3,805 (16 percent) applications of the total received. Of the 14,576 applications accepted for processing through February 3, 2006, 12,440 (85 percent), were completed by May 2006. Of
these, 14,576 applications were accepted, 11,954 approved, 486 denied, and 2,116 remained pending. Approximately 56 percent of accepted cases were completed within 90 days of filing (8,097 completed of 14,576 considered). Had it not been for delays caused by FBI name check issues, the 90-day completion rate would have exceeded 81 percent. Only 2,337 interim benefits
were issued to DORA applicants – 13 percent of the total number of DORA green card applications. Nationally, virtually all applicants applying for green cards receive interim benefits because processing in nearly all offices takes longer than 90 days.

DORA demonstrates how up-front processing eliminates the need to issue interim benefits to the vast majority of green card applicants. In DORA, most of the cases that would eventually be denied under the current USCIS process—approximately 16 percent of all DORA applications—are rejected at the outset. Of the cases that were accepted and completed under
DORA within 90 days, only 2.52 percent were denied. For DORA cases delayed beyond the 90-day processing time target the denial rate is only 2.27 percent. Therefore, if USCIS had processed all green card cases from May 2004 to February 2006 consistent with the DORA process, it would only have issued approximately 3,369 EADs to ineligible green card applicants,
just over one percent of the number of benefits it actually issued. DORA would have provided even more substantial improvements had it required pre-application security screening, another element of the Ombudsman’s up-front processing model.
 
Top