Kennedy, Schumer, Leahy stick it to USCIS

nyc_naturalizer

Registered Users (C)
My apologies if this was already posted. It's from March 20, but I don't recall seeing mention of it here.

I hope the good senators get the data they're asking for, and that it is ultimately made public.



KENNEDY, SCHUMER, LEAHY URGE ACTION ON PENDING NATURALIZATION APPLICATIONS

States News Service

WASHINGTON


The following information was released by Massachusetts Senator Edward M. Kennedy:

Last night, Senators Edward M. Kennedy, Charles Schumer, and Patrick Leahy sent the following letter to Secretary Michael Chertoff urging action on the backlog of pending naturalization applications at the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).

The senators are asking for information from the USCIS, specifically annual reports on immigration functions, including the average processing period of applications and detailing the quantity of backlogged applications and petitions, and the Department of Homeland Security' estimate of the cost of clearing the application backlog by the end of FY 2008.

The text of the letter is below.


March 19, 2008

Secretary Michael Chertoff

Department of Homeland Security

20 Massachusetts Ave. NW

Washington, DC 20529

Dear Secretary Chertoff:

We are deeply troubled by the serious backlog of naturalization applications pending adjudication at the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).

Last year, USCIS announced it would increase the naturalization fee by 80% from $330 to $595 (if the biometrics fee increase is included, the total fee increase is from $400 to $675, or 69%). As a result, almost a million and a half immigrants applied for naturalization before the increase went into effect. The agency justified the unprecedented fee increase by arguing that it would solve many agency problems and pay for a 20% efficiency improvement in adjudicating naturalization applications. At the time, USCIS reported that the average processing time for naturalization was 5.57 months, just under its stated six-month goal.

However, the USCIS recently announced that it will take 14-16 months to process naturalization applications filed after June 2007. In other words, for naturalization applications filed after the fee increase, USCIS is now charging almost twice as much for a service that takes twice as long.

The agency has responded to previous Congressional inquiries on this issue by stating that it could not have foreseen this surge in applications. We do not find that argument persuasive. Every previous naturalization fee increase has had the same effect. Preceding each of the naturalization fee increases in 1998, 2002 and 2004, a large surge in applications took place. It should have come as no surprise that the agency received 1.4 million naturalization applications in FY 2007, nearly double the volume received in the previous fiscal year. Despite knowledge that the fee increase would bring a surge in applications, the agency apparently did nothing to prepare for it. Clearly, a work plan should have been put in place well before the fee increase was implemented.

We understand that USCIS is now preparing a response plan to deal with the backlog. The agency has begun to hire an additional 1,500 employees, of whom 723 are adjudicators. To date, 580 have been hired, including 274 adjudicators. We also are aware that the office of Personnel Management, on request of USCIS, has extended USCIS temporary authority to rehire retired annuitants to assist in clearing the backlog. We commend these efforts, but we understand that the agency does not believe they will have an impact soon enough to ensure that most of the applicants who filed in FY 2007 will become U.S. citizens in FY 2008.

We recognize that the FBI name check verification process is delaying approximately 145,000 naturalization applications. But the FBI cannot be held responsible for the vast majority of the naturalization applications backlog. In fact, according to the USCIS Production Update Reports, USCIS does not include applications currently held by the FBI in the official count of its backlog.

It has also recently come to our attention that last year, USCIS experienced a so-called front log, in which the agency did not immediately process many naturalization applications received by mail and failed to send applicants a receipt confirmation for several months. Thus, the agency delayed the date on which the applicant was entered in the USCIS system to begin the adjudication process. We are concerned about this problem, and we wish to learn more about what occurred last year and what steps the agency has taken to eliminate the front log.

In order to fully understand the scope of the USCIS backlog and front log problems, we request further information. Our specific requests are contained in the attachment. The agency' responses will help us fully understand the scope of the backlog and front log problem and identify the areas where the agency needs the most assistance in alleviating these delays. It will be especially helpful to the Committee to have this information prior to your appearance before the Committee on April 2, 2008 and so we ask that you return the information by March 28, 2008.

We also ask that you report to the Committee on a bi-weekly basis from this time forward on the progress made in the adjudication of naturalization applications, including how many cases have been completed during each two-week period and how many are still pending, including the dates of submission of the pending cases.

We appreciate your assistance with this request, and we ask you to coordinate your responses with Wendy Young, Chief Counsel for Immigration Policy, Subcommittee on Immigration (202) 224-7878; wendy_young@judicicary-dem.senate.gov, Matt Virkstis, Counsel, Judiciary Committee (202) 224-7703; matthew_virkstis@judiciary-dem.senate.gov, and Sandra Gallardo, Senior Counsel, Oversight and Investigations (202) 224-3112; Sandra_gallardo@help.senate.gov With respect and appreciation, and we would be grateful for your prompt consideration of our request.

Sincerely,

Patrick J. Leahy Edward M. Kennedy Charles E. Schumer

Chairman Chairman Chairman

Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration Subcommittee on

Refugees and Border Security Administrative

Oversight and the Courts

REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION

Please produce the responses to the questions described below by delivering the responses to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Room 224, Washington, D.C. 20510, attention: Matt Virkstis, and the Hart Senate Office Building, Suite 615, Washington D.C. 20510, attention: Sandra Gallardo and Nick Bath at or before 5 p.m. on March 28, 2008 and updated responses every two weeks thereafter.

Pending Naturalization Applications

(1) The Homeland Security Act Section 478 (6 USCS 298) requires that USCIS issue an annual report on immigration functions, including the average processing period for immigration applications, disaggregated by application or petition type. Please provide the current processing time for naturalization applications (N-400).

(2) The Homeland Security Act Section 478 (6 USCS 298) also requires that USCIS issue an annual report on immigration functions that details the quantity of backlogged immigration applications and petitions, the aggregate number awaiting processing and a detailed plan for eliminating the backlog. Please provide the quantity of backlogged naturalization applications (N-400), the aggregate number of naturalization applications (N-400) presently awaiting processing, and the Department' current detailed plan for eliminating the backlog in naturalization applications.

(3) In the Department' best estimation, how much would it cost to clear the naturalization application (N-400) processing backlog by the end of FY 2008?

(4) For all naturalization applications (N-400) currently pending at USCIS (that is, applications for which adjudication has not been completed and approval or denial has not been issued), please provide the number of days the application has been pending at USCIS. The number of days should be calculated from the date the application was received by USCIS at its mail center. [1] Please also provide the date on which USCIS projects these applications will be completed.

Naturalization Application Front Log

(5) In the summer of 2007, USCIS developed a substantial front log in N-400 applications/petitions (situations in which applicants did not receive a confirmation of receipt from USCIS for months after submission of the application).

a. As set forth in the chart below, please provide the number of naturalization applications (N-400) that have been in USCISa possession for over two weeks (14 days), but for which USCIS has not issued a confirmation of receipt to the applicant (797 form). Also, please provide the date USCIS projects that receipts will be issued to these applicants. The number of days should be calculated from the date the application was received by USCIS at its mail center.

b. For all naturalization applications (N-400) received between March 1, 2007 through March 18, 2008, please provide the number of days that elapsed between USCISa receipt of the N-400 applications and the date that USCIS issued the applicant a confirmation of receipt, as set forth in the chart below.

c. In updates submitted subsequent to the initial response to this request, for naturalization applications (N-400) received between March 18, 2008 and the date of the update, please provide the number of days that lapsed between USCISa receipt of the N-400 applications and the date a confirmation receipt was sent to the applicant, as set forth in the chart below.

FBI Name Check

(6) Please provide the total number of naturalization applications currently pending with the FBI for the name check verification process.

(7) Please provide a breakdown, as set forth in the chart below, of how long the applications listed in response to the previous question that are currently in the custody of the FBI (if there is an aging report available for these cases, please provide that report to the Committee).

March 20, 2008
 
Step in right direction!

We recognize that the FBI name check verification process is delaying approximately 145,000 naturalization applications. But the FBI cannot be held responsible for the vast majority of the naturalization applications backlog.

It will be especially helpful to the Committee to have this information prior to your appearance before the Committee on April 2, 2008 and so we ask that you return the information by March 28, 2008.

We also ask that you report to the Committee on a bi-weekly basis from this time forward on the progress made in the adjudication of naturalization applications.

Sounds like a terrific plan!

But how about 145,000 naturalization applications stuck in name check?! Anything to do with persistent CIS's claim that it's only 1 miserable %?
 
Cybex

Sounds like a terrific plan!

But how about 145,000 naturalization applications stuck in name check?! Anything to do with persistent CIS's claim that it's only 1 miserable %?

Cybex,

I saw you after a long time. How have you been doing. Send me a msg & tell me what you are upto these days. You waiting on something from USCIS or you're all set.
 
Hi Atlanta_Brother,

I'm fine, just back from overseas vacation, and swamped with work. Following latest developments, and hoping to vote this November! Nothing from CIS though.
 
they need to put some fire on FBI's ass for name check process too...

The USCIS is one thing, the FBI is quite the other. They try to put ANYTHING under FBI's ass, the FBI will make sure they are caught with drugs and/or hookers.
 
Could this request from the Senators for USCIS to provide all the details to them explain the delay in USCIS posting processing dates? IF it is indeed the cause, then processing dates will not show up before 27th on USCIS website.
 
Could this request from the Senators for USCIS to provide all the details to them explain the delay in USCIS posting processing dates? IF it is indeed the cause, then processing dates will not show up before 27th on USCIS website.

That's an interesting theory. Normally, the processing times are posted a week after they are released, which means they should have been posted last Friday. I've even seen them get posted on Saturdays a couple of times. However, I have a feeling that we won't be seeing anything until this coming Friday.
 
That's an interesting theory. Normally, the processing times are posted a week after they are released, which means they should have been posted last Friday. I've even seen them get posted on Saturdays a couple of times. However, I have a feeling that we won't be seeing anything until this coming Friday.
If that's the case then by the time we see the numbers, they will already be way out of date since they will be based on information that is already two weeks past - doesn't sound like much, but that's 50% of the reporting period.

If some DOs, which were previously reporting July 20, 2007 processing dates, have moved to July 27, 2007 then it would be fair to assume that by the time the numbers are released that they would essentially be complete with July! Not a bad thing necessarily, but I think they should try to make their updates more "real time" in nature since for most of us this is the only update we receive on our cases unless we go for Infopass appointments.

On another note, I am happy to hear about interviews being scheduled after business hours and on weekends as well. One has to assume that this is affecting mainly the busiest DOs, and not places like Ohio that are way ahead of the game at this point. If they can increase their interview capacity by 20 - 30% then that bodes very well for those of us still waiting in the queue.
 
On another note, I am happy to hear about interviews being scheduled after business hours and on weekends as well. One has to assume that this is affecting mainly the busiest DOs, and not places like Ohio that are way ahead of the game at this point. If they can increase their interview capacity by 20 - 30% then that bodes very well for those of us still waiting in the queue.

Couldn't they just give us a choice to interview anywhere within the US? e.g. they could just have a nation wide (or atleast a Service Center wide) queue and give the applicant the choice to either interview at local DO or any other DO in the US. So, applicants willing to go the extra mile to get faster service could be accomodated, may I add at no extra cost to the tax payers.
 
Couldn't they just give us a choice to interview anywhere within the US? e.g. they could just have a nation wide (or atleast a Service Center wide) queue and give the applicant the choice to either interview at local DO or any other DO in the US. So, applicants willing to go the extra mile to get faster service could be accomodated, may I add at no extra cost to the tax payers.

Good idea.
Also the Local DO is not always the closest.
My DO is Memphis, yet Louisville is actually closer to my house & a lot faster at processing it seems.
 
Couldn't they just give us a choice to interview anywhere within the US? e.g. they could just have a nation wide (or atleast a Service Center wide) queue and give the applicant the choice to either interview at local DO or any other DO in the US. So, applicants willing to go the extra mile to get faster service could be accomodated, may I add at no extra cost to the tax payers.
Great idea! Out here in California, the USCIS does try to do some "level loading" between the DOs, making people from LA drive to Orange County for their interviews, but this is entirely at the discretion of the USCIS. Maybe they should have a box you can check on the application that indicates your willingness to travel, at your own expense, to the DO that can accomodate you the fastest. That would not only speed up processing for people who choose that route, but also have the added benefit of speeding things up, by removing applicants from the interview queue, for those who choose not to travel but are stuck at the DOs with the slowest processing times. It's way too logical for the USCIS though, so don't get your hopes up.
 
Great idea! Out here in California, the USCIS does try to do some "level loading" between the DOs, making people from LA drive to Orange County for their interviews, but this is entirely at the discretion of the USCIS. Maybe they should have a box you can check on the application that indicates your willingness to travel, at your own expense, to the DO that can accomodate you the fastest. That would not only speed up processing for people who choose that route, but also have the added benefit of speeding things up, by removing applicants from the interview queue, for those who choose not to travel but are stuck at the DOs with the slowest processing times. It's way too logical for the USCIS though, so don't get your hopes up.

Interesting to know it happens at USCIS discretion in So. Cal. Up here in Nor. Cal, SF DO and Sac DO wrap up cases in half the time it takes for SJ DO and although all 3 are within driving distances, there is no load balancing being done here.
 
(3) In the Department' best estimation, how much would it cost to clear the naturalization application (N-400) processing backlog by the end of FY 2008?

I wonder if that is a good sign or an indication that congress potentially plans to release money to the USCIS to clear the backlog by end of 2008.
 
I wonder if that is a good sign or an indication that congress potentially plans to release money to the USCIS to clear the backlog by end of 2008.

Considering the fact that the majority of Congress is comprised of Democrats, it's quite possible that Congress has vested interest in creating more Democratic voters, since it's widely presumed that naturalized citizens will vote Democratic.
 
I wonder if that is a good sign or an indication that congress potentially plans to release money to the USCIS to clear the backlog by end of 2008.

The key point is that it forces USCIS to put a dollar figure on returning to (an already disfunctional) normalcy in naturalization processing. Without this there can't even be a question of congress releasing money, and USCIS can just continue to prevaricate on whether it is addressing the problem to the best of its ability.
 
This is almost end of March 2008. This has been going on since June/July 2007. Seems like empty talk. Just talk.
 
That's how government works..they wait till something is broken, talk about it in committees to see how they can fix it, and then throw some money at it to make it go away only to have it happen again later. It's part of the government management life cycle..without it many people would be out of work since processes would be too efficient and not require human intervention.
 
without it many people would be out of work since processes would be too efficient and not require human intervention.

Are you envisioning something like an ATM for naturalization? Think about it... you walk up to the machine, insert credit card for payment, it takes your picture and fingerprints, scans your documents, runs necessary checks against federal databases, adminsters a quick breathalyser exam and tests a sample of bodily fluid to check moral character, picks 10 questions at random from the exam to answer, followed by English writing test onscreen, then oath administered by placing hand on a pdf of the bible, and finally it gives you a printout of the citizenship certificate.
 
Top