Office of Immigration Statistics

POLICY DIRECTORATE

Estimates of the Size and Characteristics of 

the Resident Nonimmigrant Population 

in the United States: January 2011

BRYAN BAKER

INTRODUCTION

This report presents estimates of the size and characteristics of the resident nonimmigrant 

population in the United States. The estimates are daily averages for the 12-month period centered 

on January 1, 2011. The term resident nonimmigrant as used in this report refers to foreign nationals 

who are legally admitted into the United States for specific, temporary purposes and whose classes 

of admission are associated with residency (e.g., students and temporary workers, as opposed to 

tourists and business travelers). The characteristics analyzed include category of admission, country 

of citizenship, age, sex, and destination state. The estimates are derived from U.S. Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS) administrative records of nonimmigrant arrivals and departures. 

The size of the resident nonimmigrant population was 

about 1.9 million on average during July 1, 2010–June 

30, 2011. Approximately 45 percent of the population 

were temporary workers and their families, nearly 40 

percent were students and their families, half were from 

Asian countries, and over 80 percent were ages 18 

through 44.

DATA AND METHOD

Overview

The population size was estimated in three steps using 

arrival and departure data from nonimmigrant visits. In 

the first step, visit-length frequency tables were tabulated from nonimmigrant visit records that had been 

reconstructed by matching arrival records with departure records. In the second step, expected days of 

residence in the U.S. were calculated for each visit using 

the arrival date on the arrival record and the visit-length 

distributions calculated in the first step. Only days of 

residence that would have occurred during the 

12-month period were counted. In the third step, the 

average daily expected population size was calculated by 

adding the expected days of residence together across 

all visits from the second step and then dividing the 

total by 365.1

Arrival and departure records were used because there 

are no national census or survey data that identify nonimmigrants separately from other foreign-born persons. 

The population was estimated, as opposed to measured, 

because departure records were not available for all visits. 

For example, some visits were ongoing, while others 

ended without generating a departure record. Presence in 

(or absence from) the U.S. could not be determined in 

the absence of a departure record. The data and methods 

are described in further detail in the following sections.

1 The method could also be used to estimate the population size on January 1, but 

because of seasonal fluctuation, the average population size of the course of the 

year was found to be a more meaningful concept.

Data

Nonimmigrant arrival and departure data were obtained 

from DHS Form I-94 Nonimmigrant Arrival/Departure Record and 

provided by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). 

Information collected on Form I-94 includes arrival 

date, departure date, port of entry, class of admission, 

country of citizenship, state of destination, age, and sex. 

Data were available for arrivals from October 1, 2001 

through June 30, 2011 and for departures from October 

1, 2004 through June 30, 2011. 

The arrival and departure sections of form I-94 are submitted separately and come preprinted with identical 

tracking numbers. During the admission process, a CBP 

officer either collects the arrival section of the I-94 or 

updates a preexisting, electronic I-94 record to reflect a 

repeat arrival during the previously authorized admission period. The departure data, on the other hand, are 

less reliably collected and may be absent for a variety of 
2 DHS Office of Immigration Statistics

reasons. For example, some visits might not have ended by the date 

the data are compiled, the nonimmigrant might adjust to LPR status, or the nonimmigrant might depart without submitting the 

departure section of the I-94. Based on recent trends, departure 

records are eventually collected for 75-80 percent of all resident 

nonimmigrant visits, but fewer than 50 percent are collected in the 

same year as the arrival.

Whenever possible, the arrival and departure sections were 

matched together to reconstruct the visit history. An arrival record 

was considered to be a match with a departure record if the preprinted tracking number, first initial of last name, and date of birth 

were identical on both sections. About 97 percent of departure 

records are successfully matched to an arrival record each year. 

Visit length was calculated from the arrival and departure dates for 

each of the reconstructed visit records. 

Analysis was restricted to resident nonimmigrant classes of admission, i.e., classes characterized by visits lasting 2 months or longer 

on average.2 The 2-month duration was chosen in order to be consistent with the residence definitions used in the U.S. Census 

Bureau’s American Community Survey and DHS estimates of the 

size and characteristics of the unauthorized immigrant population 

(Hoefer et al, 2012). Because admission under a residence class 

does not guarantee residence in the U.S. for every individual 

admitted under that class, data were further restricted by omitting 

records clearly exhibiting commuter behavior (i.e., 7 or more visits in the same year).

2 See Appendix I for a list of resident nonimmigrant classes of admission.

Method

The population size was estimated by taking the average of the 

expected number of days of presence during the 12-month period, 

July 1, 2010–June 30, 2011. The expected days of presence were 

calculated for each visit using the actual arrival date and the visitlength distribution estimated for the given class of admission and 

country of citizenship. Only days of presence that would have 

occurred during the 12-month period were counted toward 

the total.

Step 1—Reconstruct Visit Records and Estimate Visit-length Distributions. Visit 

records were reconstructed by matching arrival records with 

departure records. An arrival record was found to be a match 

with a departure record if the preprinted tracking number, first 

initial of last name, and date of birth were identical on both 

records. Visit length, or the number of days between arrival and 

departure, was calculated from the arrival and departure dates for 

each of the reconstructed visit records. 

Next, visit-length frequency tables for each class of admission and 

country of citizenship were tabulated from the reconstructed visit 

records. Only visits with a departure during the 12-month period 

were included in the tabulations. The frequency tables were then 

converted into probability distributions by dividing by the number of visits.

The visits used for the frequency tables were limited to those 

with departures during the 12-month period in order to avoid 

selection bias. Without such a restriction, longer visits would be 

dis proportionately excluded because they are less likely to have ended 

by the date on which the data were compiled. The resulting visitlength distributions were assumed to be representative of all visits, 

but were not representative of either the matched or unmatched visits 

alone. As a result, days of presence had to be estimated for all arrivals, 

not just those without matching departure records.

Step 2—Calculate the Expected Number of Days of Presence during the 12-month 

Period for Each Visit. In the second step, the expected number of days 

of presence in the U.S. during the 12-month period is calculated 

for each visit by applying the visit-length distribution (estimated 

in Step 1 for each class of admission and country of citizenship) 

to the actual arrival date on the arrival section of the I-94. The calculation is performed by taking the sum across all possible visit 

lengths (D = 1 day, 2 days, 3 days, ..., max) of the product of the 

number of days that would have occurred during the 12-month 

period if the visit lasted D days and the probability that the visit 

lasted D days.

Step 3—Calculate Total and Convert to Daily Average. The average daily 

expected number of days of presence (i.e., the estimated population size) is calculated taking the sum of all of the expected days 

of presence from Step 2 (overall or within a specific group) and 

dividing the total by 365.

LIMITATIONS

The accuracy and precision of the population estimates depend on 

how well the reconstructed visits with a departure during the 

12-month period represent all visits within each class of admission and country of citizenship. Some of the more apparent or 

important limitations are discussed below. 

Adjustment to LPR status

Limited departure data are available for nonimmigrants who 

adjust to legal permanent resident status. The impact on estimated 

visit-length and nonimmigrant population size is expected to be 

small, in general, because relatively few visits result in adjustment 

to LPR status. For example, fewer than 250,000 resident nonimmigrants adjusted to LPR status in fiscal year 2010, despite more 

than 5.4 million resident nonimmigrant admissions. The impact 

may be greater among classes and countries with higher adjustment rates. For example, the number of adjustments per admission 

in FY 2010 was 1 in 5 for H4 dependents, 1 in 9 for H-1B workers, and only 1 in 60 for seasonal workers. Results are presented 

only for broad categories of classes because of the clustering 

of adjustments.

Effect of visit length on probability of Form I-94 loss 

or damage

If the probability that a nonimmigrant will lose the departure stub 

prior to departure increases with visit length, then longer visits may 

be underrepresented in the observed visit-length probability distributions, and the population size may be underestimated as a result.

Choice of classification variables

Visit length is known to vary with class of admission and country 

of citizenship, but may also change with additional classification 
DHS Office of Immigration Statistics 

variables within some subgroups. For example, student visits that 

begin with the start of the fall semester may be more likely to end 

after 9 months than student visits that start in January. Similarly, 

Canadian workers in Texas may tend to take fewer trips home than 

Canadian workers in Michigan. Restricting the method to the two 

primary classification variables limited complexity and ensured 

that many data points were available at most levels, but did so at 

the possible expense of a more robust model.

Increasing arrival volume

The observed visit-length distributions are based on completed 

visits with an arrival between Oct. 1, 2000 and June 30, 2011 and 

a departure recorded between July 1, 2010 and June 30, 2011. 

Because arrival flow tends to increase slightly each year, departures 

in the most recent year disproportionately reflect more recent 

arrivals. Therefore the visit-length distributions, and the resulting 

population estimates, are likely to be slightly biased downwards.

Stability of visit length across time

It is implicitly assumed that the visit length distribution is constant 

across time. This assumption is supported by data showing little 

variation in average visit lengths and distributions of arrival dates 

from 2007 through 2010. 

RESULTS

Category of admission

There were approximately 1.9 million nonimmigrants residing in 

the U.S. during the 12-month period centered on January 1, 2011. 

Temporary workers3

 and students comprised the largest admission 

categories, making up 45 and 38 percent of the total, respectively 

(see Table 1). Exchange visitors made up another 13 percent, followed by diplomats and other representatives (5 percent). 

Estimates for students and exchange visitor principals are consistent with counts of “active” students from the DHS Student and 

Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS) (see Appendix 2).

3 Each category of admission includes both principal nonimmigrants and dependent (non-principal) 

family members.

Table 1. 

Resident Nonimmigrant Population by Category of Admission: 

January 2011

Category of admission Number Percent

 Total .................................... 1,910,000 100

Temporary workers and families ................. 850,000 45

Students and families. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 720,000 38

Exchange visitors and families .................. 250,000 13

Diplomats,other representatives, and families ....... 90,000 5

Note: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

Source: U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

Region and country of citizenship

About half of the resident nonimmigrants (946,000) were citizens 

of Asian countries, including India (22 percent), China (9 percent), South Korea (8 percent), Japan (5 percent), and Taiwan (2 

percent) (see Table 2). Europe and North America comprised 

another 29 percent, led by Canada (8 percent) and Mexico (6 percent). The five leading countries accounted for over 50 percent of 

the total.

Temporary workers made up much larger portions of the nonimmigrant populations from India (73 percent) and Mexico (72 

percent) than from all countries (45 percent) (see Table 3). 

Nonimmigrants from Canada also tended to be temporary workers 

(55 percent). Nonimmigrants from China and Korea, on the other 

hand, were more likely to be in the U.S. on student visas (70 and 

68 percent, respectively, as compared to the average of 

38 percent).

Table 2. 

Resident Nonimmigrant Population by Region and Country of 

Citizenship: January 2011

Region Number Percent

 Total ................................. 1,910,000 100

Asia .................................. 950,000 50

 India ................................ 420,000 22

 China ................................ 180,000 9

 Korea, South ........................... 150,000 8

 Japan ................................ 90,000 5

 Taiwan ............................... 40,000 2

 All others ............................. 80,000 4

North America ........................... 300,000 16

 Canada .............................. 150,000 8

 Mexico ............................... 110,000 6

 All others ............................. 40,000 2

Europe ................................ 260,000 14

 United Kingdom ........................ 60,000 3

 Germany .............................. 50,000 2

 France ............................... 40,000 2

 All others ............................. 120,000 6

South America ........................... 100,000 5

All others ............................... 310,000 16

Note: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

Source: U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

State of destination

California was the leading destination state, making up 14 percent 

of the total population of resident nonimmigrants (see Table 4). 

The next leading destination states were New York (12 percent), 

Texas (8 percent), Florida (5 percent), and New Jersey (5 percent). The top 5 destination states accounted for 44 percent of the 

total, and the top 10 accounted for more than 60 percent.

The state rankings varied by country of citizenship and category of 

admission. Disproportionately many Indians went to New Jersey 

(11 percent), disproportionately many Koreans went to California 

(21 percent), and Canadians were more likely to reside in New 

York (17 percent). Twenty-six percent of Mexicans went to Texas, 

8 percent went to California, and 6 percent went to Florida. 

Diplomats and other representatives were concentrated in New 

York (22 percent) and Virginia (13 percent) (see Table 5). 

Compared to the general population, students and exchange visitors were more likely to reside in Massachusetts and less likely to 

reside in New Jersey or Texas. 

3
DHS Office of Immigration Statistics

Table 3. 

Resident Nonimmigrant Population by Category of Admission and Country of Citizenship: January 2011

Category of admission Number

Percent

Total India China Korea Canada Mexico All others

 Total ..................................... 1,910,000 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 

Temporary workers and families .................. 850,000 45 73 14 19 55 72 36 

Students and families. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 720,000 38 24 70 68 32 17 37 

Exchange visitors and families ................... 250,000 13 2 14 12 9 8 19 

Diplomats, other representatives, and families ........ 90,000 5 — — — 4 — 8 

— Represents less than 5,000.

Note: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

Source: U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

Table 4. 

Resident Nonimmigrant Population by State of Destination and Country of Citizenship: January 2011 

(Ranked by state of destination)

State of 

destination

Total India China Korea Canada Mexico All other countries

Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

 Total ........ 1,910,000 100 420,000 100 180,000 100 150,000 100 150,000 100 110,000 100 900,000 100

California ...... 270,000 14 70,000 16 30,000 17 30,000 21 20,000 11 10,000 8 120,000 13

New York ...... 230,000 12 30,000 7 20,000 10 20,000 11 20,000 17 — — 130,000 15

Texas ........ 150,000 8 40,000 9 10,000 4 10,000 5 10,000 6 30,000 26 60,000 6

Florida ........ 100,000 5 10,000 3 — — — — 10,000 4 10,000 6 70,000 7

New Jersey .... 90,000 5 50,000 11 — — 10,000 5 — — — — 30,000 3

Massachusetts . 90,000 5 20,000 4 10,000 5 10,000 5 10,000 5 — — 50,000 5

Illinois ........ 70,000 4 30,000 6 10,000 4 10,000 4 — — — — 30,000 3

Pennsylvania ... 60,000 3 20,000 4 10,000 4 10,000 4 10,000 3 — — 30,000 3

Virginia ....... 60,000 3 10,000 3 — — — — — — — — 30,000 3

Michigan ...... 60,000 3 10,000 3 10,000 4 — — 10,000 6 — — 20,000 2

All other states . 730,000 38 150,000 35 80,000 44 50,000 37 60,000 40 50,000 45 340,000 38

— Represents less than 5,000.

Note: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

Source: U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

Table 5. 

Resident Nonimmigrant Population by State of Destination and Category of Admission: January 2011 

(Ranked by state of destination)

State of 

destination

Total Temporary workers Students and families Exchange visitors

Diplomats and

other representatives

Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

 Total ......... 1,910,000 100 850,000 100 720,000 100 250,000 100 90,000 100

California ....... 270,000 14 130,000 15 110,000 15 30,000 12 — —

New York ....... 230,000 12 90,000 11 90,000 12 30,000 11 20,000 22

Texas ......... 150,000 8 90,000 10 50,000 6 10,000 4 — —

Florida ......... 100,000 5 50,000 6 30,000 5 10,000 4 — —

New Jersey ..... 90,000 5 60,000 7 20,000 3 10,000 4 — —

Massachusetts .. 90,000 5 30,000 3 50,000 6 20,000 7 — —

Illinois ......... 70,000 4 40,000 4 30,000 4 10,000 3 — —

Pennsylvania .... 60,000 3 20,000 3 30,000 4 10,000 4 — —

Virginia ........ 60,000 3 20,000 3 20,000 2 10,000 3 10,000 13

Michigan ....... 60,000 3 30,000 3 20,000 3 10,000 3 — —

All other states .. 730,000 38 300,000 35 280,000 39 110,000 44 40,000 46

 — Represents less than 5,000.

Note: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Categories include both principals and dependents.

Source: U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

Age and sex

One third of the population was under the age of 25, 40 percent 

was 25-34, and 27 percent was 35 or older, but there was considerable variation among the top 5 countries (see Table 6 and Figure 

1). For example, 65 percent of Indian nationals were 25-34, 

Chinese and Korean nationals tended to be younger (54 and 44 

percent under 25), and Canadians and Mexicans tended to be 

older (42 and 39 percent were 35 and older, as compared to 27 

percent overall). Although the age distributions for males and 

females closely resembled the overall age distribution, males 

tended to be older; 31 percent were 35 or older, as compared to 

22 percent of females (see Figure 2).

Slightly more than half of the total population was male (55 percent) 

(see Table 7). The percentages that were male were higher for nationals of India, Canada, and Mexico (58, 56, and 73 percent) and lower 

than 50 percent for nationals of China and Korea. Temporary workers 

and diplomats were disproportionately likely to be male (60 and 62 

percent), 54 percent of students were male, and fewer than half of 

exchange visitors were male (48 percent) (See Figure 3).

4
DHS Office of Immigration Statistics 

Table 6. 

Resident Nonimmigrant Population by Age and Country of Citizenship: January 2011

Age

Total India China Korea Canada Mexico All other countries

Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

 Total ........ 1,910,000 100 420,000 100 180,000 100 150,000 100 150,000 100 110,000 100 900,000 100

0–17 years .... 170,000 9 30,000 8 10,000 5 20,000 16 10,000 8 10,000 8 80,000 9

18–24 years ... 450,000 24 50,000 11 90,000 49 40,000 28 20,000 16 20,000 18 240,000 26

25–34 years ... 770,000 40 280,000 65 60,000 32 40,000 30 50,000 34 40,000 34 300,000 34

35–44 years ... 320,000 17 60,000 14 20,000 10 30,000 18 30,000 22 30,000 25 160,000 18

45–54 years ... 130,000 7 10,000 2 — — 10,000 6 20,000 13 10,000 11 80,000 8

55 years and over 60,000 3 — — — — — — 10,000 7 — — 40,000 4

— Represents less than 5,000.

Note: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding or exclusion of unknown values; age is unknown for 10,000.

Source: U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

Table 7. 

Resident Nonimmigrant Population by Sex and Country of Citizenship: January 2011

Sex

Total India China Korea Canada Mexico All other countries

Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

 Total ........ 1,910,000 100 420,000 100 180,000 100 150,000 100 150,000 100 110,000 100 900,000 100

Male ......... 1,050,000 55 250,000 58 80,000 47 70,000 48 80,000 56 80,000 73 480,000 54

Female ....... 820,000 43 170,000 39 90,000 51 70,000 50 60,000 42 30,000 25 390,000 44

Note: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding or exclusion of unknown values; sex is unknown for 40,000 persons.

Source: U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

5

FOR MORE INFORMATION 

For more information about immigration and immigration statistics, visit the Office of Immigration Statistics Web site at www.dhs.

gov/immigrationstatistics.
6 DHS Office of Immigration Statistics

APPENDIX 1

Table A1

Nonimmigrant Classes of Admission Associated with Residency

Class Description

Temporary workers and families

 Temporary workers and trainees

H1B ........ Workers in specialty occupations

H1B1 ....... Chile and Singapore Free Trade Agreement aliens

H1C ........ Registered nurses participating in the Nursing Relief for Disadvantaged Areas

H2A ........ Seasonal agricultural workers

H2B ........ Seasonal nonagricultural workers

H2R ........ Returning H2B workers

H3 ......... Trainees

H4 ......... Spouses and children of H1, H2, or H3

O1 ......... Workers with extraordinary ability or achievement

O2 ......... Workers accompanying and assisting in performance of O1 workers

O3 ......... Spouses and children of O1 and O2

P1 .......... Internationally recognized athletes or entertainers

P2 .......... Artists or entertainers in reciprocal exchange programs

P3 .......... Artists or entertainers in culturally unique programs

P4 .......... Spouses and children of P1, P2, or P3

Q1 ......... Workers in international cultural exchange programs

R1 ......... Workers in religious occupations

R2 ......... Spouses and children of R1

TN .......... North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) professional workers

TD .......... Spouses and children of TN

 Intracompany transferees

L1.......... Intracompany transferees

L2.......... Spouses and children of L1

 Treaty traders and investors

E1 .......... Treaty traders and their spouses and children

E2 .......... Treaty investors and their spouses and children

E3 .......... Australian Free Trade Agreement principals, spouses and children

 Representatives of foreign information media

I1 .......... Representatives of foreign information media and spouses and children

Students

F1.......... Academic students

F2.......... Spouses and children of F1

M1 ......... Vocational students

M2 ......... Spouses and children of M1

Exchange visitors

J1 .......... Exchange visitors

J2 .......... Spouses and children of J1

Diplomats and other representatives

A1 .......... Ambassadors, public ministers, career diplomatic or consular officers and their families

A2 .......... Other foreign government officials or employees and their families

A3 .......... Attendants, servants, or personal employees of A1 and A2 and their families

G1 ......... Principals of recognized foreign governments 

G2 ......... Other representatives of recognized foreign governments 

G3 ......... Representatives of nonrecognized or nonmember foreign governments

G4 ......... International organization officers or employees

G5 ......... Attendants, servants, or personal employees of representatives

N1 to N7 ..... North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) officials, spouses, and children

Other categories

Q2 ......... Irish Peace Process Cultural and Training Program aliens 

Q3 ......... Spouses and children of Q2

Source: U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

Note: All class categories include both principals and dependents.
DHS Office of Immigration Statistics 

APPENDIX 2

Counts of active students and exchange visitors and estimates of 

nonimmigrant academic enrollments are available from other 

sources and are presented here for comparison with the I-94-

based estimates of the population residing in the U.S. Average 

population sizes for active students, exchange visitors, and dependents were calculated from quarterly program statistics tabulated 

from the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (see 

SEVIS By the Numbers). Survey-based estimates of academic-year 

enrollments for international students were obtained from the 

Institute of International Education (see Open Doors). The alternative estimates differ from the Office of Immigration Statistics 

(OIS) estimates because they measure types of enrollments as 

opposed to residence and, in the case of Open Doors, define students differently. Further, because the activity status of dependents 

in SEVIS is determined by the status of the principal, dependents 

may be included in the SEVIS counts without presence in, or entry 

into, the U.S. All differences are smaller than observed for the 

2008 estimates (Baker, 2010).

The number of active students estimated from quarterly SEVIS data 

was 810,000, which exceeds the estimated size of the population 

in residence by 18 percent; the active student estimate exceeds the 

size of the residential population because students may retain 

active status while abroad between semesters. Open Doors estimated 720,000 international student enrollments for the 

2010/2011 academic year (see Table A2-1). The enrollment estimate exceeds the residential population size because students may 

not be enrolled for the entire year or may spend part of the year 

abroad, and because the estimate includes nonimmigrant visa 

classes other than students. Open Doors excludes some students 

because the survey is limited to accredited institutions of higher 

education.

The number of registered dependents of active students estimated 

from quarterly SEVIS data was 80,000, which exceeds the estimated residential population size by 66 percent; registered 

dependents of active students are included in SEVIS counts regardless of presence in the U.S. Open Doors does not provide estimates 

of student dependents.

The numbers of active exchange visitors and dependents estimated 

from quarterly SEVIS data were 190,000 and 50,000 respectively. 

The estimate for active principals was 6 percent below the estimated residential population size, and the estimate for active 

dependents exceeded the residents estimate by 24 percent. 

Table A2-1

Comparison against Alternative Data Sources

Class of admission SEVIS Open Doors OIS

Students Principals .......... 810,000 720,000 670,000

Dependents ......... 80,000 N/A 50,000

Exchange 

visitors

Principals .......... 190,000 N/A 210,000

Dependents ......... 50,000 N/A 40,000

Sources: U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Institute of International Education.

Note: Open Doors student estimates are not restricted to nonimmigrants with F-1 or M-1 visas.

APPENDIX 3

Days of presence measured directly from reconstructed 

visit records

As noted previously, only slightly more than half of departures 

occur in the same year as the arrival. By definition, those sameyear matches exclude visits that last a full year or longer. As a 

result, visit records reconstructed from matched arrival and departure records account for only a fraction of the total number of 

days of presence during that year. On the other hand, the population measurable from matched records is useful because the 

measurements serve as a concrete lower bound for the estimates.

The size of the population with matched arrival and departure 

records was about 700,000, or 37 percent of the estimated total 

size when counting all visits. The measurable percentage did not 

vary greatly across categories of admission but varied substantially 

between principals and dependents within the student and 

exchange visitor categories (see Figure A3-1 and Table A3-1).

7
DHS Office of Immigration Statistics

Table A3-1. 

Category of Admission of the Resident Nonimmigrant Population: January 2011 

Estimates and Measurements

Category of admission

Estimates (all visits) Measurements (complete visits only) Proportion measured

Number Percent Number Percent Percent

 Total ................................... 1,910,000 100 700,000 100 37

Temporary workers and families ................ 850,000 45 300,000 43 36

Students and families. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 720,000 38 270,000 38 37

Exchange visitors and families ................. 250,000 13 100,000 14 40

Diplomats, other representatives, and families ...... 90,000 5 30,000 5 38

Note: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

Source: U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

REFERENCES

Baker, 2010. “Estimates of the Resident Nonimmigrant Population 

in the United States: 2008,” Office of Immigration Statistics, 

Policy Directorate, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, http://

www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/ois_ni_

pe_2008.pdf

Hoefer, Michael, Nancy Rytina, and Bryan Baker, 2012. “Estimates 

of the Unauthorized Immigrant Population Residing in the United 

States: January 2011,” Office of Immigration Statistics, Policy 

Directorate, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, http://www.

dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/ois_ill_pe_2011.

pdf

Institute of International Education. “Open Doors 2011 Fast 

Facts.” http://www.iie.org/Research-and-Publications/OpenDoors/Data/Fast-Facts

Monger, Randall and MacReadie Barr, 2010. “Nonimmigrant 

Admissions to the United States: 2009,” Office of Immigration 

Statistics, Policy Directorate, U.S. Department of Homeland 

Security, http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/

publications/OIS_NI_FR_2009.pdf

U.S. Department of Homeland Security. “SEVIS By the Numbers,” 

Student and Exchange Visitor Program, Immigration and Customs 

Enforcement, U.S. DHS, Q3-4 reports from fiscal year 2010 and 

Q1, Q2, and Q3 reports from fiscal year 2011. http://www.ice.

gov/sevis/outreach.htm

8