UP coming visa bulletin of month February:

[Britsimon]

Simon don't you think since there is high numbers appearing- there will be some huge wholes somewhere somehow ?

Yes, a lot more holes. That could mean the new software was more rigorous in the way it disqualified entries.

However, if these high numbers are to be belived it means that 23k selectees in Asia are spread over 40k case numbers. If that is true then visa bulletin cutoffs should be moving on faster than previous years (at least in Asia). They are not, so that is confusing.

 

[urbanite]

Yes, a lot more holes. That could mean the new software was more rigorous in the way it disqualified entries.

However, if these high numbers are to be belived it means that 23k selectees in Asia are spread over 40k case numbers. If that is true then visa bulletin cutoffs should be moving on faster than previous years (at least in Asia). They are not, so that is confusing.

I really do hope that is the case but tracking through the past fiscal years, they progress with the same monthly cutoff (referencing here to DV 2010,DV 2011 and DV 2013).

Even if the sequester was the cause for the low cutoff numbers delivered in January for all regions, February should have picked up significantly to counter the January numbers and unfortunately that didn't happen. Not to be pessimistic but having a high number myself I'm trying to get used to the idea that it may not end as I would like to.

 

[raevsky]

I really do hope that is the case but tracking through the past fiscal years, they progress with the same monthly cutoff (referencing here to DV 2010,DV 2011 and DV 2013).

Even if the sequester was the cause for the low cutoff numbers delivered in January for all regions, February should have picked up significantly to counter the January numbers and unfortunately that didn't happen. Not to be pessimistic but having a high number myself I'm trying to get used to the idea that it may not end as I would like to.

I would say if we take sequester into account, numbers would be appearing higher than they are. Because if less contractors work, then less cses are entered into the system, and that would make DOS to publish higher cutoffs to supply enough amount of visa applicants

 

[urbanite]

I would say if we take sequester into account, numbers would be appearing higher than they are. Because if less contractors work, then less cses are entered into the system, and that would make DOS to publish higher cutoffs to supply enough amount of visa applicants

Interesting!, I must have missed the part that visa bulletin factor the number of responses KCC receives which are in turn entered in CEAC systems.

 

[Britsimon]

I would say if we take sequester into account, numbers would be appearing higher than they are. Because if less contractors work, then less cses are entered into the system, and that would make DOS to publish higher cutoffs to supply enough amount of visa applicants

Noooo - that doesn't sound right (and is not what we saw).

The contractors that could have been sequestered were the ones at KCC - right? Their job would have been to schedule interviews and package up the paperwork. We saw schedules suggesting that schedules were sparse.

So if I am DOS and I allot a target of 1000 interviews and the team only manage 300, my reaction would NOT be to increase the target the following month - I would reduce the target to make sure normal service has been resumed. THEN I would try and play catch up later on (Vladeks big jump).

 

[raevsky]

In the last months of DV-12 the cutoff for Europe increased to 40000 while the largest number available was about 32K. The same thing happened in last months of DV-13 33K cutoff when the max number was about 30532. That proves two things:
1. The scheduling unit does not take into account the largest possible number.
2. The less the number of documents submitted to KCC is, the larger the cutoff published is. And that has some logic - in order to satisfy the demand, you need a higher cutoff if the amount of supply is lower.

As a consequence, we see that the larger the effect of government shutdown is, the higher the cutoffs are. The fact is that the cutoffs were not higher than I expected. That would mean government shutdown had no effect on cutoff scheduling.

 

[Britsimon]

In the last months of DV-12 the cutoff for Europe increased to 40000 while the largest number available was about 32K. The same thing happened in last months of DV-13 33K cutoff when the max number was about 30532. That proves two things:
1. The scheduling unit does not take into account the largest possible number.
2. The less the number of documents submitted to KCC is, the larger the cutoff published is. And that has some logic - in order to satisfy the demand, you need a higher cutoff if the amount of supply is lower.

As a consequence, we see that the larger the effect of government shutdown is, the higher the cutoffs are. The fact is that the cutoffs were not higher than I expected. That would mean government shutdown had no effect on cutoff scheduling.

I'm gonna sleep on that. Still sounds wrong....

 

[dolopar]

Guys are the higher case numbers that are appearing genuine?? I doubt!

 

[Rayme]

i have a serious doubt on those high cases as all of a sudden they appear from somewhere claims some number if they really exist they would be serious about the cases and would do much inquiry as we been constantly saying some risk for high cases this year so i have deep suspect on those i think some are playing game and same person is doing this...

Guys are the higher case numbers that are appearing genuine?? I doubt!

 

[dolopar]

I have exactly the same feeling.

 

[rigateika]

In the last months of DV-12 the cutoff for Europe increased to 40000 while the largest number available was about 32K. The same thing happened in last months of DV-13 33K cutoff when the max number was about 30532. That proves two things:
1. The scheduling unit does not take into account the largest possible number.
2. The less the number of documents submitted to KCC is, the larger the cutoff published is. And that has some logic - in order to satisfy the demand, you need a higher cutoff if the amount of supply is lower.

As a consequence, we see that the larger the effect of government shutdown is, the higher the cutoffs are. The fact is that the cutoffs were not higher than I expected. That would mean government shutdown had no effect on cutoff scheduling.

Raevsky,

I would agree with your statement (red highlighted by me) if you say instead:
2. The less the number of cases sitting in KCC and waiting to be processed is, the larger the cutoff published is.

I think it is important to understand that out of 10000 cases submitted to KCC, there could be 3000 cases prepared for Embassies and still 7000 cases waiting to processed. This will result in lower cutoff.
Or there could be 9000 cases prepared for Embassies and 1000 cases waiting to be processed. This will result in higher cutoff.

So in my opinion to decide on cutoff - number of documents submitted to KCC is not as important as the number of documents sitting in queue to be processed.

With the government shutdown people didn't stop sending the documents to KCC. And KCC didn't stop accepting the documents. They may entered them into the system. But they were not able to process them at normal rate. This is how backlog was created.

I am with Britsimon on this.