TABLE OF CONTENTS 

I. INTRODUCTION 1
 

II. IMMIGRATION FILES 1
 

A. Digitization of Immigration Files – Recommendation 1 1 

B. Recording File Movement – Recommendation 2 2 

C. Mandatory Training – Recommendation 3 3
 

III. IMMIGRANT VISAS 4
 

A. Processing of I-140 Petitions – Recommendation 4 4 

B. EB-1 Tip Sheet – Recommendation 5 5 

C. I-140 Data Capture 5 

D. Special Immigrant Visas 6 

IV. DNA TESTING 8
 

A. Blood Testing Methods – Recommendation 6 10 

B. Coordination with the Department of State – Recommendation 7 10 

C. USCIS DNA Liaison – Recommandation 8 10 

V. TRANSFORMATION AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ENHANCEMENTS 10 

A. Coordination and Communication 11
 

B. Pilots 11 
 

VI. INFORMATION AND CUSTOMER SERVICE 13 
 

A. National Customer Service Center 13 

B. Web Site Improvements 14 

C. Case Status Online and Service Request Management Tool Online 14 

VII. ITEMS OF NOTE 15 
 

A. Training 15 
 

B. Requests for Evidence 16 

C. K-3 Visa Family Reunification Process 17 

D. USCIS Fee Funding Structure 17 

VIII. CONCLUSION 18 
 

IX. APPENDIX A: Acronyms And Initialisms 19 

X. APPENDIX B: Recommendation Charts 22 
 

RESPONSE TO THE CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES 

OMBUDSMAN’S 2009 ANNUAL REPORT 

AUGUST 2009 

I. INTRODUCTION 

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) appreciates the in-depth analysis of the 

agency’s procedures and processes provided by the Citizenship and Immigration Services 

Ombudsman (CISOMB) in the 2009 Annual Report to Congress. USCIS provides the 

following responses to CISOMB’s recommendations and observations. 

II. IMMIGRATION FILES 

Immigration files record an alien’s progression through the immigration process from initial 

entry through naturalization. They contain key documents that establish identity as well as a 

record of any immigration benefits granted. USCIS recognizes the importance of these 

documents and is taking steps to ensure that paper files are properly maintained and tracked 

while continuing efforts to digitize immigration files. 

A. Digitization of Immigration Files – Recommendation 1 

The Ombudsman recommends that USCIS immediately begin scanning immigration files 

that are likely to be needed for future adjudications. 

USCIS Response: USCIS has had a strategy for scanning immigration files in place for the 

past 3 years. A Scan on Demand Application (SODA) was also implemented at the 

National Records Center (NRC) in the second quarter of Fiscal Year (FY) 2009 to begin 

responding to requests for information in files by scanning the Alien File (A-File) within a 

designated timeframe. Subject to the Transformation strategy and budget challenges, Phase 

2 of SODA will continue expansion of digitized responses of select types of A-File requests 

at the NRC. 

USCIS began the digitization pilot with the establishment of the Records Digitization 

Facility (RDF) in FY 2006 and deployment of the Enterprise Document Management 

System (EDMS) in FY 2007. Together, these initiatives allow USCIS to convert paper AFiles to a digital format and to deliver that content to the user’s desktop. 

In FY 2008, as a result of an Office of Management and Budget (OMB) direction, USCIS 

was tasked to eliminate interagency mailing of immigration files between USCIS, 

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and Customs and Border Protection (CBP). 

This action is being addressed by Phase 1 of SODA. 

For the past 3 years, USCIS has converted a variety of paper A-Files to digitized files. The 

converted A-Files have been primarily Temporary Protected Status (TPS), military 

- 1 -
 

 

naturalization, oversized A-Files, and files from the Law Enforcement Support Center 

(LESC). These files were chosen primarily to evaluate the digitization process and learn 

how digitized files can be most effectively used in the adjudication process. 

B. Recording File Movement – Recommendation 2 

The Ombudsman recommends that USCIS establish new protocols to ensure that relevant 

contract staff consistently record all A-File movement as outlined in the Records Operation 

Handbook. 

USCIS Response: USCIS believes that existing protocols are sufficient to enable 

compliance with proper A-File tracking requirements. The Records Operation Handbook 

(ROH) contains the policies, procedures, and guidelines for how a File Control Office 

(FCO)1 should manage A-Files and other immigration records to preserve both the integrity 

and the availability of the records. These offices can create, store, transfer, receive, 

maintain, and retire A-Files. The FCO is responsible for all files in its jurisdiction to 

include sub-offices, field offices, ports of entry (POEs), and Border Patrol stations. Files in 

use at any ICE or CBP location must be accounted for during official file audits, which are 

conducted no less than once per year as directed in the ROH. FCOs are required to follow 

all guidelines in the ROH in order to maintain file integrity and be responsive when files are 

requested. 

The current Records Services Service Level Agreement (SLA) with ICE and CBP, which 

provides USCIS support for A-File movement, certification of true copies, certification of 

non-existence of records, etc., states that the agencies: 

...will adhere to policies and procedures mandated in the Records Operation 

Handbook (ROH) - URL address http://ors.uscis.dhs.gov/ 

pol_imp/roh/index.htm and in the Records Digitization Facility Customer 

Guide - URL address http://ors.uscis.dhs.gov/elec_rec/RDF/RDFTOC_ 

cust.htm. ICE and CBP are responsible for requesting, using, managing, and 

returning Alien Files in compliance with the ROH and RDF Customer Guide. 

In addition, the SLAs will adhere to all pertinent statutes, regulations, 

Executive Orders, and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) policies and 

procedures including, but not limited to, DHS Management Directives (MD) 

#0710.1, Reimbursable Agreements and #0550.1, Records Management. 

Many of the issues in recent years revolve around the timeliness of file transfers and 

responsiveness to file transfer requests. Even as USCIS begins to evolve into a more 

electronic environment, there are 59 million A-numbers and millions more immigration 

records that are either in use today or likely to be in use in the future. In order to better 

prepare for digitizing these records, USCIS will ensure: 

 Files are properly consolidated when needed; 

1

 An FCO is an office that is authorized to manage A-Files and receipt files. 

- 2 -
 

 

	 File requests are honored quickly so temporary files are not created unnecessarily; 

and 

	 Files (including empty A-File jackets2) are tracked appropriately so files may be 

located immediately. 

The Records Division, using audits and systems checks, will implement quality assurance 

support for USCIS, ICE, and CBP components. During the first quarter of FY 2010, the 

Records Division is “standing up” the Records Electronic Systems Training and Quality 

Assurance Team (REST-QA Team) to enhance A-File integrity in the field. The REST-QA 

Team, working with local offices, will conduct A-File audits, offer records training, and 

provide helpdesk support. 

C. Mandatory Training – Recommendation 3 

The Ombudsman recommends that through the Tri-Bureau Working Group (USCIS, 

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and Customs and Border Protection (CBP)), 

USCIS expeditiously institute mandatory training of all personnel who work with A-Files, 

specifically special agents, investigators, and officers. 

USCIS Response: Through the Tri-Bureau Working Group, USCIS will encourage use of 

USCIS’s extensive Web-based records training, which includes Records Awareness 

training, National File Tracking System (NFTS) training, and Central Index System (CIS) 

training. USCIS is also in the process of complying with the recent Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS) mandate to conduct mandatory records awareness training 

throughout USCIS. The training includes A-File management and emphasizes the 

importance of appropriately tracking records. The training is available to ICE and CBP. 

USCIS is also developing USCIS Academy Records Training and the REST-QA Team 

program, which will begin providing this critical training in the first quarter of FY 2010. As 

noted above, the REST-QA Team will work with local offices to conduct A-File audits, 

offer records training, and provide helpdesk support. 

Under the current agreement with ICE and CBP, “USCIS will provide training through a 

varied method of delivery such as train-the-trainer, web-based, classroom, and CDs, for the 

National File Tracking System (NFTS), the Central Index System (CIS), Records 

Management, the Enterprise Document Management System (EDMS), and other systems to 

be developed.” Training is available and access to all systems is provided upon request. 

USCIS will be working with ICE and CBP over the coming months on the Records Services 

SLA for FY 2010 and will provide support for records training and understanding of the 

ROH policies. Although USCIS cannot mandate training for ICE and CBP personnel, 

USCIS will work through the Tri-Bureau Working Group to make certain that ICE and CBP 

users receive the necessary training in an expeditious manner. USCIS believes this will 

2

 On October 18, 2008, USCIS published a policy memorandum that provided clarification on the necessary 

audit process that must be completed prior to the issuance of empty A-File jackets. 

- 3 -
 

ensure consistent use of records and compliance with A-File management policies and 

procedures by ICE and CBP. 

III. IMMIGRANT VISAS 

Section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) outlines the number of 

immigrants that may be granted permanent residence (i.e., visa numbers). Each year 

Section 202(a) of the INA sets numerical limitations on individual foreign states. 

Specifically, Section 202(a)(2) of the INA states in pertinent part: 

Subject to paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), the total number of immigrant visas 

made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under 

subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed 7 

percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or 2 percent (in the case of a 

dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such 

subsections in that fiscal year. 

Accordingly, certain countries (e.g., India, China, the Philippines, and Mexico) have 

different priority dates since there are more individuals from those countries seeking 

permanent residence in the United States. Because the number of individuals from these 

countries seeking permanent residence in the United States often exceeds the 7 percent 

annual limit, these individuals have longer waiting times for visa numbers. 

Although USCIS recognizes the frustration that many immigrants undergo as a result of the 

long waiting times, the agency is unable to increase the number of visas available to 

applicants absent a legislative change to the INA. 

A. Processing of I-140 Petitions – Recommendation 4 

The Ombudsman recommends that USCIS review processing methods for employmentbased petitions between the Nebraska and Texas Service Centers to make American 

Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act (AC21) portability provisions equally 

available to all customers. 

USCIS Response: USCIS appreciates CISOMB’s concerns for making the portability 

provisions of AC21 equally available to all customers, but must clarify the adjudication 

practices at the Texas Service Center (TSC). In the Annual Report, CISOMB indicates that 

TSC holds the adjudication of an I-140 filed concurrently with Form I-485 until an 

immigrant visa is immediately available. That is incorrect. Beginning in August 2008, TSC 

began adjudicating I-140s that were concurrently filed regardless of whether an immigrant 

visa was immediately available. If a case is approvable, and a visa is immediately available, 

TSC approves both the I-140 and I-485. If a visa becomes unavailable due to retrogression 

after the I-140 and I-485 have been filed, TSC processes the underlying I-140 petition, as 

does the Nebraska Service Center (NSC). Both Service Centers take steps to ensure a 

prompt final adjudication of the I-485 once a visa number again becomes immediately 

- 4 -
 

 

 

 

available, including initiating required background and fingerprint checks and ensuring that 

the applicant has submitted all required initial evidence. In the case of retrogression of 

immigrant visa numbers, USCIS’s goal is to have, by the end of FY 2009, all pending I485s, including those filed concurrently with Form I-140, ready for prompt adjudication 

when immigrant visas again become immediately available. In such cases, USCIS will 

coordinate with the Department of State (DOS) to ensure that DOS will have full visibility 

of the agency’s pending I-485 inventory and will be able to accurately set the priority cutoff 

dates in their monthly Visa Bulletin. 

NSC and TSC are on track to reach the 4-month agency processing time goal for I-140 

petitions, by the end of the current fiscal year, as outlined in the 2007 Fee Rule. Once the 4-

month processing time goal is achieved, the volume of still-pending I-140 petitions 

supporting long-pending I-485 applications will be minimal. For the overwhelming 

majority of applicants who file concurrently, the I-485 will have been pending for less than 

180 days prior to the issuance of a final decision on the I-140 petition, thereby addressing 

the congressional concerns regarding delays in adjudication of such cases that led to the 

enactment of the AC21 portability provisions. 

B. EB-1 Tip Sheet – Recommendation 5 

The Ombudsman recommends that USCIS post a practical tip sheet on its Web site to assist 

stakeholders in providing the necessary and relevant information for complex EB-1 cases. 

USCIS Response: USCIS posted a notice on its Web site prior to the release of the 2009 

Annual Report, entitled Questions and Answers: Petition Filing and Processing Procedures 

for Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker. The posted notice provides filing tips 

that address a wide range of Form I-140 petition issues, including information pertaining to 

the filing of complex employment-based, first preference (EB-1) petitions. 

C. I-140 Data Capture 

The CISOMB Annual Report raised concerns regarding the difficulties surrounding the 

adjudication of employment-based adjustment-of-status requests filed via Form I-485. 

Specifically, the Annual Report pointed out that USCIS lacks full visibility on specific 

aspects of its inventory of employment-based I-485s due to its case management system. 

USCIS acknowledges that the Computer-Linked Application Information Management 

System (CLAIMS) currently lacks the capability to track pending employment-based I-485s 

by country, preference, and priority date3

 of the Form I-140 immigrant worker petition, and 

to provide this inventory directly to DOS. USCIS is actively pursuing an information 

technology solution that would enable automated transmission of this information to DOS 

3

 The priority date is either the date a Labor Certification is filed with the state-level Department of Labor 

office or in cases where, by statute, a labor certification is not required, the date that the Form I-140 is filed. In 

some cases, the priority date of a previously-filed I-140 may be applied to a subsequently-filed I-140. 

- 5 -
 

so that DOS can better determine appropriate priority cutoff dates for each month’s Visa 

Bulletin. 

In the meantime, USCIS has implemented an interim solution for Service Centers to track 

this information on all pending employment-based adjustment applications and to share it 

with DOS and CISOMB. Further, the Centers are processing cases well ahead of visa 

availability and placing orders for a visa number in the DOS system. In other words, while 

USCIS cannot approve these cases due to statutory limits on annual immigration, we are 

preparing them for prompt adjudication so that they can be completed as soon as the 

person’s place in the line of those waiting to immigrate through the preference is reached. 

These procedures together give DOS the detail necessary to set monthly Visa Bulletin 

priority dates. Preparing these cases for prompt adjudication also expedites case completion 

once a visa number is available. As of the end of June 2009, USCIS had adjudicated 

108,583 employment-based I-485s and prepared an additional 139,309 for prompt 

adjudication upon DOS announcement of availability of visa numbers for such adjustment 

applicants. USCIS anticipates completing or preparing for prompt adjudication all 

employment-based cases otherwise outside its processing time goal by later this calendar 

year. In addition, we will post the underlying inventory report and provide detailed 

information about the volume and specifics of cases prepared for prompt adjudication on the 

USCIS Web site so a customer with a pending employment-based I-485 has more detail 

about case status and can better determine his or her place in the immigrant visa queue. 

D. Special Immigrant Visas 

The CISOMB Annual Report noted that USCIS “has continually added innovations to its 

customer service processes” for petitions relating to Special Immigrant Visas (SIV) for 

Afghan and Iraqi nationals who have been employed by or on behalf of the U.S. 

Government, and that USCIS “has regularly fine-tuned its processes to meet the many 

challenges faced by this group of petitioners.” 

USCIS appreciates these statements but also recognizes the concern noted in the CISOMB 

Annual Report about possible underutilization of SIV visas. First, as acknowledged by the 

Report, the full visa allocations for the translator program were used during FY 2007 and 

FY 2008. Indeed, in light of high demand, as evidenced by a substantial backlog of 

approved petitions awaiting visa numbers, the caps were significantly increased from 50 to 

500 visas per year; these increased caps were also reached. Usage patterns under the much 

larger section 1244 program for Iraqis, and the new similar program for Afghans, are as yet 

unclear. It should be noted that, although the initial legislation on the section 1244 program 

was passed in late January 2008, it was not until June 2008 that technical amendments to the 

legislation actually made visas available for FY 2008. Therefore, the large disparity 

between visas technically available in that fiscal year, and those issued, is somewhat 

artificial because the program was only stood up late in the fiscal year. 

- 6 -
 

 

As indicated by Figure 11 in the CISOMB Annual Report, section 1244 approvals by 

USCIS are up sharply in FY 2009 compared to the initial year of the program. As further 

discussed below and in the CISOMB Annual Report itself, there are many factors affecting 

usage of this program that are outside the control of USCIS, including the specific statutory 

requirements, the uncertain actual size and composition of the potential applicant pool, DOS 

procedures abroad, and conditions within Iraq and Afghanistan. Despite these factors, 

USCIS has made an effort to make the process user-friendly by adjudicating the petitions as 

expeditiously as possible, consistent with the requirements of the statute and without 

compromising national security. 

1. Cycle Times 

The 2009 Annual Report noted that attorneys who represent Iraqi and Afghan SIV selfpetitioners observed average cycle time for SIV I-360 self-petitions of 8-12 months. This is 

not an accurate reflection of the situation. The NSC, which has sole jurisdiction of the 

adjudication of SIV-360 self-petitions, generally adjudicates the petitions within 2-4 weeks 

of receipt. It appears that the cycle time referenced in the CISOMB Annual Report 

encompasses the entire process from petition-filing to the issuance of the SIV and admission 

to the United States. Since USCIS is not involved in the consular visa issuance process, any 

questions involving timing for this process after the I-360 is approved by USCIS and 

forwarded to the National Visa Center (NVC) (if the petitioner is outside the United States) 

should be addressed by DOS. 

2. SIV Petitioner Experience 

The CISOMB Annual Report expressed concern that some potential SIV petitioners are 

dissuaded from filing due to qualification requirements, delays caused by security reviews 

and potentially slow official responses to requests for information. USCIS does not by word 

or deed discourage qualified petitions. USCIS does not have the authority to change 

qualification requirements, which were established by Congress in the relevant legislation. 

As indicated above USCIS normally completes its part of the processing within a few 

weeks. Any information that is requested by the petitioner from the DOS Chief of Mission 

or from the petitioner’s supervisor to fulfill the filing requirements is outside the control of 

USCIS. 

Any questions on timing of the security reviews conducted by DOS prior to visa issuance 

should be addressed by DOS. 

3. Denied Petitions 

The CISOMB Annual Report is also concerned that USCIS lacks a standardized review 

process for denied petitions or for delayed SIV petitions and refugee applications. This is 

not an accurate assessment. There are standard review processes for review of denied cases. 

In the case of SIV petitions, the review process is the same as for any other applications or 

petitions filed with USCIS. Supervisory review is required for every SIV I-360 denial. 

- 7 -
 

 

Once the petition is denied and the notice sent, the petitioner has 30 days to appeal the 

decision. Most SIV petitioners are outside the United States and go through consular 

processing to obtain an immigrant visa. DOS can address any questions regarding visa 

refusal review processes. 

With respect to refugee cases, questions regarding the status of refugee cases are generally 

sent to the DOS Overseas Processing Entity or USCIS Field Office Director with 

jurisdiction over the case. There is no appeal for a denial of an application for refugee status. 

USCIS may exercise its discretion to review a case upon timely receipt of a request for 

review (RFR) from the principal applicant. The request must include one or both of the 

following: (1) a detailed account explaining how a significant error was made by the 

adjudicating officer or (2) new information that would merit a change in the determination. 

USCIS understands that CISOMB intends to further analyze the RFR process for denied 

refugee applications, and USCIS is prepared to provide any additional information as 

needed. 

IV. DNA TESTING 

The CISOMB Annual Report indicated that, in USCIS’s response to Formal 

Recommendation 26, USCIS stated that the recommended actions regarding DNA testing 

were “unnecessary.”4

 USCIS, however, must clarify this point: It was neither explicitly 

stated nor implied in its response to the recommendation that such actions were 

unnecessary. Instead, USCIS stated that the agency was drafting updates to section 

204.2(d)(2)(vi) of Title 8, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) to require DNA testing in 

certain situations. USCIS also noted that, although current regulations do not specifically 

allow officers to require DNA testing, guidance does allow petitioners to voluntarily submit 

additional evidence, including DNA testing, to meet their burden of proof to show the 

existence of a specific relationship. In requesting additional evidence pursuant to 8 

CFR 103.2(b)(8), USCIS can, on a case-by-case basis, recommend that petitioners 

voluntarily submit DNA results as evidence of a claimed biological relationship. At present, 

DNA testing can only be recommended, not required. In the 2006 response, USCIS stated 

that “USCIS does not preclude requiring DNA testing as a standard procedure sometime in 

the future as new technology and competition make such testing more widely available and 

affordable.”5 

The CISOMB Annual Report correctly pointed out in the April 2006 recommendation that 

DNA provides the most conclusive scientific evidence of paternity and that birth records 

from many countries are unreliable. However, until the laws or the regulations are changed, 

USCIS may only suggest DNA testing as a means of secondary evidence if evidence 

submitted does not fully establish eligibility for the requested benefit. CISOMB is correct 

that 8 CFR 204.2(d)(2)(vi) stipulates that the only type of relationship testing that may 

4

 Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman 2009 Annual Report to Congress, p. 45. 

5 USCIS Response to Formal Recommendation 26: DNA Testing, p. 2. 

- 8 -
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

currently be required by USCIS officers is the now obsolete venipuncture-based Blood 

Group Antigen or Human Leukocyte Antigen (HLA) testing. 

USCIS has drafted language to remove the references to HLA testing in 8 CFR 

204.2(d)(2)(vi) and replace it with a broader standard of DNA testing requirements. 

Although work continues to this end, a new regulation has not yet been published. At this 

juncture, USCIS plans to draft language that merely removes specific references to HLA 

testing in 8 CFR 204.2(d)(2)(vi) and reserves the subchapter for a future regulation. This 

would eliminate the authority to require relationship testing through an obsolete method and 

allow USCIS to continue to suggest DNA testing while a new regulation with a broader 

requirement for DNA testing is reviewed. 

In this year’s Annual Report, CISOMB compares USCIS to DOS in terms of relationship 

testing and DNA collection. It is important to note that DOS is also bound by the 

regulations in 8 CFR in determining visa eligibility, and as such, may also only suggest, but 

not require, DNA testing as a means of secondary evidence in such cases. DOS guidance 

found in the Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM), which is the equivalent to the USCIS 

Adjudicator’s Field Manual (AFM), states: 

[DNA testing] is preferred over older technologies such as HLA and ABO 

blood typing because...it is more accurate when all parties are not available 

for testing...DNA technology should be the only method accepted for proof 

of a biological relationship.6 

This should not be interpreted to mean that DOS has the authority to require DNA testing 

for visa determinations. In fact, the FAM specifically states that genetic testing “cannot be 

required”7 and should only be recommended.8 The USCIS AFM provides similar guidance: 

...as a result of technological advances, field offices should be aware that 

Blood Group Antigen and HLA tests are no longer widely available for 

testing by laboratories, and are not considered to be as reliable as DNA 

tests....9 

There is no real disparity between the two agencies’ guidance as the CISOMB Annual 

Report implies. Both USCIS and DOS are aware of the problems that exist with the 

obsolete method of relationship testing specifically referenced in 8 CFR and are also aware 

6

 9 Foreign Affairs Manual 42.41 Exhibit II. 

7 9 Foreign Affairs Manual 42.41 PN 4.7. 

8 However, DOS has greater latitude to require DNA evidence in the refugee processing context. Pursuant to
 

its role in determining which refugees are of “special humanitarian concern to the United States” under INA 

Section 207(a)(3), DOS establishes the categories and criteria for applicants to qualify for resettlement
 

consideration. In the case of family-based cases, for example, DNA evidence could be established as one of
 

the criteria. Once an applicant establishes that he or she meets the access criteria to be considered in the U.S. 

refugee program, USCIS determines the person’s eligibility for refugee status under DHS regulations. 9

 Adjudicator’s Field Manual, Chapter 21.2(d). 

- 9 -
 

 

 

of the immense value of DNA testing. To this end, USCIS and DOS continue to work 

together towards a solution. 

A. Blood Testing Methods – Recommendation 6 

The Ombudsman recommends that USCIS remove references to obsolete blood testing 

methods from the Adjudicator’s Field Manual (AFM) and other published guidance. 

USCIS Response: USCIS will continue to pursue changes to 8 CFR 204.2(d)(2)(vi) to 

remove references to the obsolete blood testing. 

B. Coordination with the Department of State – Recommendation 7 

The Ombudsman recommends that USCIS continue to coordinate with the U.S. Department 

of State regarding DNA testing procedures and execute a Memorandum of Understanding 

(MOU) with DOS for resource allocation for DNA evidence gathering and chain-of-custody 

observance abroad. 

USCIS Response: USCIS has been discussing DNA issues with DOS and will continue to do 

so. USCIS has yet to determine the benefit or necessity of executing a Memorandum of 

Understanding (MOU) with DOS. USCIS and DOS are reviewing an update to the FAM 

addressing DNA relationship testing procedures and chain-of-custody issues. USCIS believes 

it would be premature to enter into an MOU at this stage. 

C. USCIS DNA Liaison – Recommendation 8 

The Ombudsman recommends that USCIS designate a USCIS DNA liaison to facilitate 

discussions between USCIS and the U.S. Department of State, as well as to periodically 

provide clarifications for DNA laboratories. 

USCIS Response: USCIS has in fact already designated a point of contact (POC) and 

subject matter expert within the agency to field questions about DNA testing. USCIS has 

established contacts with lab technicians and other officials at DHS, DOS, and the 

Department of Justice (DOJ) to assist with the development of new regulations. USCIS’s 

current POC for DNA matters is responsible for coordinating all internal meetings as well as 

meetings between USCIS and other agencies and departments. 

V. TRANSFORMATION AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ENHANCEMENTS 

In the annual report, CISOMB commented extensively on the USCIS transformation and 

related improvement efforts. As pointed out by CISOMB, USCIS has begun to analyze its 

existing system to develop business requirements that will enhance customer service and the 

data integrity for USCIS. The analysis and data requirements gathered have led to 

conclusions that some existing systems are obsolete or incapable of expanding beyond 

- 10 -
 

current functions. The Office of Transformation Coordination (OTC) has identified vital 

functions from these systems and intends to integrate them into new system requirements. 

A. Coordination and Communication 

As accurately stated in the report, synchronization among the various components 

responsible for transformation is essential. As such, the Office of Information Technology 

(OIT) has created a new division, OIT Transformation Support Division (TSD), to increase 

its level of dedicated support to the transformation effort. This new division will provide 

significant improvement in coordination and communication efforts between OIT and OTC. 

OIT’s newly established senior management team has placed greater emphasis on 

cooperation and collaboration to build a mutually advantageous relationship with OTC. 

OTC will continue to work closely with the OIT and the Solution Architect contractor 

towards the agency’s transformation. This collaboration will enable the agency to have a 

better understanding of its legacy system capabilities while alleviating system conflicts and 

identifying parallel approaches and initiatives for future IT solutions. 

OTC and OIT have established dedicated liaisons who meet on a consistent basis to report 

issues, changes, and associated impact. These reports and constant interaction between both 

program offices will provide for greater information-sharing and fortify the necessary 

dialogue for success. 

B. Pilots 

CISOMB’s Annual Report highlighted three system pilots linked to transformation. As 

noted in the CISOMB Annual Report, the functionality of the Biometric Support System 

(BSS) is critical to the transformation effort. It provides a bridge to shared biometric 

information between the legacy environments and more robust IT systems. However, the 

current biometric functions in the legacy environment are supported by inefficient systems 

that will be discontinued as the transformation initiative progresses. 

BSS functionality has been integrated into a new system called the Customer Profile 

Management System (CPMS). CPMS will include all the functionality of BSS and the 

functionality of the Background Check Service (BCS). CPMS will replace several legacy 

systems and eliminate more than 140 distributed servers. The CPMS will: 

	 Route fingerprint data to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and US-VISIT 

for enumeration and background investigations; 

	 Store background investigation results from the FBI; 

	 Route card data used to produce permanent residency documents, employment 

authorization documents (EADs), and travel documents; and 

	 Provide a repository of card data used by USCIS and other agencies to validate 

immigration status. 

- 11 -
 

USCIS intends to implement CPMS in phases with the first phase scheduled for deployment 

in November 2009. This phase will include the ability to receive and store the images and 

relevant biographic data related to permanent resident cards, EADs, reentry permits and 

refugee travel documents, including radio frequency identification (RFID) data used by 

CBP. This data can be queried and viewed through the Person-Centric Query Service 

(PCQS). Since the PCQS user interface does not provide all features found in the Image 

Storage and Retrieval System (ISRS), both ISRS and PCQS will remain operational until a 

later release of CPMS. That subsequent release will contain a complete alternative to the 

ISRS user interface, thus enabling the retirement of ISRS. 

The latter phases of CPMS will be integrated into the Solution Architect’s integrated master 

schedule once the new timelines and deliverables are accepted by USCIS. 

The second pilot that was highlighted by CISOMB is the Secure Information Management 

Service (SIMS) Pilot. SIMS was developed as a proof-of-concept to test a variety of 

operational and technical concepts related to the evolution of a long-term USCIS enterpriselevel case management system. 

SIMS has evolved through three phased releases. Sims Version 3.0 is operating at the 

National Benefits Center and three field offices: Newark, Memphis and Buffalo. While 

SIMS has provided substantial information as a pilot, the functionality currently being 

provided by SIMS is expected to be incorporated into the Transformation Solution in 

Releases 3 and 4. The migration of the current SIMS data will be accomplished in 

Release 3. 

The third pilot highlighted in the CISOMB’s Annual Report is the Identity Management 

Pilot also referred to as Enumeration. USCIS began using the US-VISIT IDENT Exchange 

Messaging (IXM) interface to US-VISIT IDENT to assign enumerators to individuals in the 

SIMS Pilot. The Enumeration interface that USCIS built against the US-VISIT IXM 

interface has been made available on the ESB for other USCIS applications to reuse. 

The current plans for the expansion and re-use of this interface are as follows: 

	 USCIS will be reusing the US-VISIT enumeration interface in support of the Adam 

Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act for fingerprints provided to USCIS from 

DOS Consular Affairs. USCIS will also reissue the interface for petitioners filing 

family-based immigrant visa petitions via a DOS overseas consulate. This use of 

US-VISIT will allow USCIS to determine if the petitioner has committed a 

“specified offense against a minor” as part of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and 

Safety Act requirement. USCIS will submit these prints to the FBI’s Integrated 

Automated Fingerprint Identification System (IAFIS) via the US-VISIT IXM 

interface. 

	 USCIS will conduct background checks against US-VISIT and IAFIS. Both systems 

are expected to be reused within the transformation initiative. 

- 12 -
 

 

	 USCIS will use this US-VISIT IXM interface and the enumeration services in the 

Solution Architect’s Release 2. 

OTC is developing a roadmap from legacy systems to a streamlined and centralized 

biometric data collection and management system that will be part of the Transformation 

Solution. The new system will allow USCIS to retire the costly and ineffective legacy 

biometric infrastructure. 

USCIS would like to expand on a point made in the CISOMB Annual Report. In discussing 

the Enterprise Performance Analysis System (ePAS), the report states, “USCIS has not yet 

designed ePAS, and has no timeline for deployment.”10 While it is true that ePAS has yet 

to be designed, USCIS is in the process of completing its Requirements Development Phase. 

USCIS is currently in the seventh month of an eight-month requirements-gathering effort for 

ePAS, with the final Functional Requirements Document scheduled for delivery in October 

2009. OTC has been actively involved in this process and will continue to play a role in the 

design and development of ePAS. After the requirements documents are reviewed, a final 

timeline for design and development of the enterprise system will be established. 

VI. INFORMATION AND CUSTOMER SERVICE 

As in the 2008 report, CISOMB pays particular attention to customer service and the USCIS 

Web site. USCIS continues to place significant emphasis on improving customer service 

and has been particularly active with its efforts to produce a more user-friendly Web site. 

USCIS has formed several focus groups for the redesign of the Web site and has sought 

input from various stakeholders, including community-based organizations (CBOs), the 

American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), and CISOMB, to assist in this effort. 

A. National Customer Service Center (NCSC) 

USCIS recognizes that when Customer Service Representatives (CSRs) do not adhere to the 

scripts they risk providing customers with incorrect information. USCIS continues to work 

with the contractors to ensure that CSRs follow the scripts, and extensive quality control 

procedures are in place, including random call monitoring, to ensure that procedures are 

followed correctly. The NCSC is a valuable resource, particularly for customers who do not 

have Internet access or do not know where to begin the process. The NCSC also has the 

ability to take “service requests.” These requests detail the customer’s inquiry and are 

forwarded directly to the office that is handling the customer’s case. The receiving office is 

tasked to provide the customer with a written response. 

10 Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman 2009 Annual Report to Congress, p. 12. 

- 13 -
 

Generally, customers report a positive experience when using the NCSC. A customer 

satisfaction survey is administered by a third party to customers who have recently called 

the NCSC and spoken to a CSR. During the past year, customers reported an 85 percent 

satisfaction rate. Customers experience minimal wait times to speak to a CSR, once the 

customer selects the option of speaking with a CSR from the Interactive Voice Response 

menu, the customer is connected with a CSR in less than 1 second. USCIS continues to 

make improvements to enhance the NCSC capabilities to respond effectively and timely to 

customers. 

B. Web Site Improvements 

USCIS appreciates the CISOMB’s concern about the Web site and wishes to note that, in 

conjunction with the Office of Science and Technology Policy (within the Executive Office 

of the President), USCIS accelerated Web site redesign efforts and launched the new site on 

September 22, 2009. The revised www.uscis.gov is a customer-centric Web site with new 

tools to help customers learn about applying for immigration benefits and tracking the status 

of their filed applications. The home page has a “where to start” widget for new users to 

identify their place in the immigration process and learn about relevant services and benefits 

available. In addition, the most-searched immigration topics and important customer tools, 

such as the office locator and online appointment scheduling, are available directly from the 

home page. The revised Web site provides a dashboard view of an individual’s case status 

as it relates to the major steps taken to process the most common application types. It also 

provides a contextual overview of national processing volumes and trends. 

C. Case Status Online (CSOL) and Service Request Management Tool (SRMT) 

Online 

In August 2009, the USCIS Office of Information Technology implemented an initiative to 

provide updates from Claims 3 and Claims 4 with the Customer Relationship Interface 

System (CRIS). This eliminated interface problems and CRIS now receives action codes 

from Claims 3 and Claims 4 which provides additional case status messages to customers. 

As part of the website redesign USCIS has updated the display of case status information. 

Case status information is displayed differently to provide more context to the customer 

about the adjudication process and how their case is progressing. The new display provides 

the customer with one web page where he or she will be able to see: 

• What processing step the case is in; 

• Where that particular step falls in the process as a whole; 

• National goals and average processing times; and 

• Specific processing times for the office where the case is pending. 

Prior to the web redesign, customers could sign up to have their case status messages 

e-mailed directly to them. Currently, the customer is also able to sign up to receive text 

messages that alert him or her to case status changes. 

- 14 -
 

 

 

VII. ITEMS OF NOTE 

A. Training 

USCIS recognizes the importance of training and continuously seeks to identify areas that 

will assist employees in the development and fulfillment of their professional 

responsibilities and future leadership roles. With the 2007 fee rule, USCIS has been able to 

continue offering BASIC training and expand other training opportunities available at the 

USCIS Academy. 

USCIS Academy programs play a critical role in USCIS’s ability to fulfill Goal 6 of the 

USCIS Strategic Plan: “Operate as a high-performance organization that promotes a highly 

talented workforce and a dynamic work culture.” In order to continue providing excellent 

customer service and assuring there are no gaps in future leadership, USCIS built the USCIS 

Academy to develop employees and future leaders. USCIS is pleased with the extent to 

which employees, supervisors, and managers have taken advantage of the expanded training 

opportunities to enhance employee and mission performance; assist with individual career 

development; and develop current and future leadership for the agency. 

In 2007, USCIS created a totally new BASIC Training Program with an increased focus on 

preparing new employees to be job-ready at the completion of their training. Practicums 

providing new employees with field training and hands-on experience were added to the 

instructional courses. As part of the agency’s efforts to continuously improve the training 

programs, USCIS seeks feedback from students. Many have indicated that additional 

computer training would be beneficial. Based on that feedback, the BASIC course was 

updated in July 2009 to include several additional courses devoted to computer training. 

Prior to arriving at the Academy, students have an opportunity to take introductory courses 

on electronic reference tools, computer systems, and EDMS. BASIC training has also been 

expanded to provide students with computer training on the systems they will use on the job, 

such as the Interagency Border Inspection System (IBIS), NFTS, and CIS, as well as various 

Microsoft applications. Overall, the 2009 revision of the BASIC curriculum enhances the 

readiness of new employees. 

Beginning in FY 2008, newly hired adjudicators must fulfill the requirements of the 

National Job Proficiency Certification (NJPC). The NJPC provides local office directors 

with a checklist to document a student’s completion of instruction, practicum, and on-thejob training. Validation of BASIC is set for completion by the end of FY 2009. Validation 

is a formal assessment by a certified agent to establish that the training course design, 

content, and delivery ensure all trainees have the opportunity to be job-ready. 

B. Requests for Evidence (RFEs) 

USCIS appreciates CISOMB’s concerns regarding the number of RFEs issued at the 

National Benefits Center (NBC) and the Service Centers. USCIS will continually review 

- 15 -
 

internal processes to ensure that RFEs are issued in a timely manner and only when 

necessary to establish eligibility for the benefit sought. USCIS will promulgate new 

guidelines governing the issuance of RFEs to ensure consistency, efficiency and proper 

scope. The guidelines will be informed by public engagement and a robust feedback loop 

with agency personnel at all levels. To further improve the RFE process, USCIS will also 

initiate in FY10, quality reviews of RFEs by supervisors, and specific feedback to 

employees who issue RFEs. 

1. National Benefits Center (NBC) 

NBC has focused on improving internal case reviews to ensure that RFEs are sent only for 

those items that are necessary to the adjudication of the benefit but were not initially 

submitted or found elsewhere in the file. In 2007 a working group was formed to revise and 

simplify RFE phrases, based largely on feedback from external stakeholders. The simplified 

RFE statements were implemented in early 2008 and have contributed to applicants 

submitting complete RFE responses, which helps cases move through the process with 

increased efficiency and speed. For each type of application the Center processes, NBC 

frequently reviews the percentage of the applications to which adjudicators are issuing 

RFEs. Identifying if the rate of RFEs for a specific application type has increased or 

decreased significantly alerts NBC management to more closely review the RFEs being 

issued to determine if additional guidance is necessary in all cases for initial evidentiary 

requirements. Because of these efforts, the number of RFEs issued by the NBC has dropped 

from an average of 50 percent in 2007 to 38 percent in 2008. 

2. Service Centers 

The Office of Service Center Operations (SCOPS) continues to work with all four Service 

Centers to examine and minimize adjudicative inconsistencies in the field. In the Annual 

Report, the CISOMB noted the varying rates at which RFEs are issued at the Vermont 

Service Center (VSC) and California Service Center (CSC) for H-1B, L-1A, L-1B, O, and R 

nonimmigrant classifications. There are, however, a variety of items that need to be taken 

into account when comparing the number of RFEs issued for these classifications. 

It is difficult to compare the RFE rates on these nonimmigrant categories against one 

another since different types of evidence are required for each of the classifications. For 

example, the type of evidence and documentation required for a nonimmigrant O-1 alien 

with extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, or athletics is very different than that required 

for an H-1B specialty occupation. Despite varying evidentiary requirements across the 

classifications, regular communication between VSC, CSC, and SCOPS regarding 

adjudications and standards has resulted in more consistent 2008 RFE rates for CSC and 

VSC than in previous years (2006 and 2007) on H-1B, L-1A, L-1B, O, and R nonimmigrant 

categories. While such communication efforts are in place to provide uniform adjudication, 

an RFE may still be necessary to adjudicate a petition, since each case is fact-dependent. In 

this regard, it is important to remember that each visa petition filing is a separate proceeding 

- 16 -
 

 

 

and is decided on the basis of the evidence in that particular proceeding. Therefore, an RFE 

may be necessary to determine eligibility. 

In March 2009, SCOPS formed a Business Operations component within its Business 

Branch to facilitate uniformity and consistency in adjudication between sister Service 

Centers. As such, the Business Operations component has been tasked with reviewing and 

determining areas where the field may need additional guidance regarding general standards 

for the issuance of RFEs. 

C. K-3 Visa Family Reunification Process 

In response to CISOMB’s 2006 Recommendation 10,11 cited in the 2009 Annual Report, 

USCIS consolidated the processing of Form I-130 and Form I-129F into a single 

adjudication and began sending both approved forms to DOS. Since 2006, USCIS has 

significantly reduced the I-130 backlog and the processing times of both forms. Because the 

adjudication of these two forms has been consolidated into a single adjudication, the 

processing time will necessarily be the same. 

Consolidation of Forms I-130 and I-129F into a single adjudication has allowed USCIS to 

process I-130 approvals consistently, thus reducing processing times and preventing the 

waste of resources and duplication of processes. 

The 2009 Annual Report suggests that the legislative intent of the LIFE Act is not being 

fulfilled since the current processing times for Forms I-130 and I-129F are the same. In the 

past, the processing time and wait for the issuance of an immediate relative immigrant visa 

were significantly longer due to lengthy I-130 processing times, coupled with the time 

needed to consular process for the immigrant visa. In light of this, Congress passed 

legislation to allow for the filing of an I-129F to allow DOS to issue a K-3 visa for a spouse 

to come to the United States as a nonimmigrant for family unity while awaiting approval of 

the I-130 petition; the spouse could then adjust status in the United States. The legislative 

intent of the LIFE Act was based on the historical I-130 backlog that existed when Congress 

created the K-3 category. USCIS has drastically reduced the backlog associated with I-130 

petitions, and the processing times are no longer at 12 months or more. USCIS is 

committed to a processing time of 6 months and is currently meeting or exceeding that 

commitment. 

D. USCIS Fee Funding Structure 

USCIS appreciates the concerns CISOMB raises regarding the USCIS funding structure, 

including the impact of the recent decline in filings and the resulting decline in revenue. 

Given the parameters of the fee structure, USCIS has reduced planned spending in several 

areas, including personnel expenses, and will continue to look for additional cost saving 

11 Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman 2006 Annual Report to Congress. 

- 17 -
 

measures and make every effort to minimize any impact on service. Consistent with the 

Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990, USCIS is required to review on a biennial basis the 

fees charged by the agency. To this end, USCIS is currently finalizing a fee study and will 

indicate whether or not existing fees need to remain the same or be changed. It is 

anticipated this process will be completed in the fall of 2009. 

In addition, the President’s FY 2010 Budget request included initial steps to reform 

immigration fees and USCIS plans to continue to work toward ensuring that fees are set at 

an appropriate level. 

VIII. CONCLUSION 

USCIS continues to enhance operational efficiency, improve customer service tools, and 

strengthen communication with stakeholders. USCIS is committed to providing further 

transparency into its operations as well as working with CISOMB to assist in the fulfillment 

of the agency’s mission. 

- 18 -
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX A. ACRONYMS AND INITIALISMS 

AC21 American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act 

A-File Alien File 

AFM Adjudicators Field Manual 

AILA American Immigration Lawyers Association 

BCS Background Check System 

BSS Biometric Support System 

CBO Community-Based Organization 

CBP Customs and Border Protection 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

CIS Central Index System 

CISOMB CIS Ombudsman 

CLAIMS Computer-Linked Application Information Management 

System 

CPMS Customer Profile Management System 

CRIS Customer Relationship Interface System 

CSC California Service Center 

CSOL Case Status Online 

CSR Customer Service Representative 

DHS Department of Homeland Security 

DOJ Department of Justice 

DOS Department of State 

EAD Employment Authorization Document 

EB-1 Employment-Based, First Preference 

EDMS Enterprise Document Management System 

ePAS Enterprise Performance Analysis System 

ESB Enterprise Service Bus 

FAM Foreign Affairs Manual 

FBI Federal Bureau of Investigation 

FCO File Control Office 

FY Fiscal Year 

HLA Human Leukocyte Antigen 

IAFIS Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System 

IBIS Interagency Border Inspection System 

ICE Immigration and Customs Enforcement 

IDENT Automated Biometric Identification System 

INA Immigration and Nationality Act 

- 19 -
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

IOE Integrated Operating Environment 

ISRS Image Storage and Retrieval System 

IVAMS Immigrant Visa Allocation Management System 

IVR Interactive Voice Response 

IXM IDENT Exchange Messaging 

LESC Law Enforcement Support Center 

MOU Memorandum of Understanding 

NARA National Archives and Records Administration 

NBC National Benefits Center 

NCIC National Crime Information Center 

NCSC National Customer Service Center 

NFTS National File Tracking System 

NJPC National Job Proficiency Certification 

NRC National Records Center 

NSC Nebraska Service Center 

NSRV National Security and Records Verification 

NVC National Visa Center 

OCFO Office of the Chief Financial Officer 

OIT Office of Information Technology 

OMB Office of Management and Budget 

OTC Office of Transformation Coordination 

PCQS Person Centric Query Service 

PIPT Program Integrated Product Team 

POE Port of Entry 

RDF Records Digitization Facility 

REST-QA Records Electronic Systems Training and Quality Assurance 

RFE Request for Evidence 

RFID Radio Frequency Identification 

ROH Records Operation Handbook 

SCOPS Service Center Operations 

SIMS Secure Information Management Service 

SIV Special Immigrant Visas 

SLA Service Level Agreement 

SMART Standard Management Analysis Reporting Tool 

SMS Short Message Service 

SODA Scan on Demand Application 

SRMT Service Request Management Tool 

TLT Transformation Leadership Team 

- 20 -
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TPS Temporary Protected Status 

TSC Texas Service Center 

TSD Transformation Support Division 

USCIS U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 

US-VISIT U.S. Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology 

VSC Vermont Service Center 

WIPT Working Integrated Product Team 

- 21 -
 

 

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX B: RECOMMENDATION CHARTS 

To monitor the agency’s progress on implementing CISOMB recommendations, USCIS has 

prepared the following recommendation charts. The charts display a summary of the 

recommendation, the date USCIS responded to the recommendation, whether USCIS agrees to 

implement the recommendation, and the status of any resulting implementation. It is important to 

note that while USCIS may have initially agreed or disagreed to implement a recommendation in 

its response, there are occasions when USCIS revisits recommendation made by the CISOMB and 

reassesses implementation. 

B1: Recommendations Results that Require Clarification 

There are several recommendations listed on the chart provided in the CISOMB 2009 

Annual Report (pp. 77-81) that USCIS needs to clarify. 

Recommendation Response Date USCIS Comments 

Annual Report 

Recommendation 2008-10: 

Workforce Elements of Surge 

Plan 

Review the workforce elements 

of its 2007 surge plan and make 

public an after-action report on 

its findings, including best 

practices, for possible future 

application surges. 

September 30, 

2008 

USCIS agreed to develop an afteraction report to review the workforce 

elements of the 2007 surge plan. In our 

response, USCIS did not agree to make 

this report public. This report has been 

completed, but USCIS does not intend 

to release this document publicly. 

Annual Report USCIS has developed and continues to 

Recommendation 2008-09: develop tip sheets to assist our 

Tip Sheets customers with filing. Since the 

Expand the use of filing CISOMB 2008 Annual Report, USCIS 

guidance “tip sheets” to reduce has developed several tip sheets 

the current “Request for September 30, including filing tips for H-1B 

Evidence” (RFE) issuance rates. 2008 nonimmigrants, filing tips for religious 

workers, and an adoption tip sheet. 

USCIS will continue to provide 

guidance to our customers, but does not 

plan to further report on this 

recommendation. 

Annual Report USCIS did not disagree with this 

Recommendation 2008-07: recommendation, nor did we state that it 

Tier 1 Call Center 

Representatives 

Ensure its Tier 1 Customer 

September 30, 

2008 

would not be implemented, as 

suggested by the symbol used in the 

recommendation status chart in the 

Service Representatives (CSRs) CISOMB 2009 Annual Report. We 

of the NCSC follow the scripted indicated we already had procedures in 

- 22 -
 

 

 

 

information and are properly place. Tier 1 representatives are 

notified of change of scripts. contractually obligated to follow the 

scripts. Failure to follow the script may 

result in disciplinary action for the Tier 

1 representative and demerits for the 

contracting agency. USCIS employs 

several quality assurance techniques to 

ensure that Tier 1 representatives are 

effectively doing their jobs. 

Annual Report 

Recommendation 2008-03: USCIS has created a national file 

National File Tracking September 30, tracking working group. This group has 

Convene a working group to 2008 both short and long term goals and is 

define and implement near-term working to implement them. 

national file tracking goals. 

Annual Report 

Recommendation 2008-02: 

Digitization Initiative 

Publicize near-term goals for the 

“digitization initiative” 

(electronic form filing and case 

processing). 

September 30, 

2008 

USCIS’s efforts to digitize immigration 

files have been widely reported in the 

public arena. The agency’s goals for 

digitizing immigration files were also 

discussed in the USCIS 2008 Annual 

Report. 

Annual Report CISOMB recommended that USCIS 

Recommendation 2007-23: amend job requirements for employees 

Training in the Field Offices to include basic knowledge of certain 

Amend job requirements to commercially-available computer 

include knowledge of certain programs. USCIS did not agree to 

commercially-available February 13, implement this recommendation, noting 

computer programs and provide 2008 that “...most employees come to the 

all interviewing officers with respective positions with a basic 

Interviewing Techniques working knowledge of relevant 

Training. commercially available programs. 

However, local training is also offered 

as needed....” 

Annual Report This recommendation has been fulfilled. 

Recommendation 2007-14: USCIS has created NFTS to track the 

Records Management location and movement of files. Other 

Define a program to ensure 

proper handling and monitoring 

of its records. The program 

February 13, 

2008 

DHS components that use immigration 

files also have access to and use of 

NFTS. While all offices are required to 

should be assigned to a USCIS use NFTS, monitoring and maintenance 

headquarters office element. of the system is conducted by 

Headquarters staff. 

Annual Report 

Recommendation 2007-12: 

Request for Evidence Issuance 

(2) Develop transparent and 

easily understandable rejection 

February 13, 

2009 

This recommendation was to develop 

transparent and easily understandable 

rejection criteria. Each application or 

petition that USCIS rejects contains a 

notice that clearly explains the reason 

- 23 -
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

criteria; for the rejection. USCIS considers this 

recommendation fulfilled. 

(3) Develop RFEs written in RFEs are issued to obtain information 

simple, more direct language or documentation material to the benefit 

with less legalese and 

personalized to the recipient for 

the limited instances in which 

February 13, 

2009 

sought; therefore, an RFE is tailored to 

the specific case to request the evidence 

needed. USCIS makes a concerted 

RFEs would be issued. effort to ensure that RFEs are relevant 

and request only what is necessary. 

Annual Report The CISOMB 2009 Annual Report 

Recommendation 2007-08: states that USCIS “has not yet fully 

Fraud Interviews implemented this recommendation.” 

Institute same-day fraud USCIS has never agreed to fully 

interviews in all field offices. implement this recommendation as 

Timely adjudication of February 13, there are several factors that may 

applications will deny fraud 2008 warrant not conducting same-day fraud 

perpetrators additional interviews. In some instances, not 

preparation time and timely conducting a same-day fraud interview 

decisions will prevent issuance will allow USCIS the opportunity to 

of interim benefits. first conduct a site visit or conduct 

further research on the case. 

Annual Report USCIS has worked closely with the FBI 

Recommendation 2007-06: regarding the name check process. 

FBI Name Check Working together, the agencies were 

(1) Evaluate the value of the able to eliminate the backlog of pending 

name check in its current format February 13, name checks. USCIS believes that the 

and establish a risk-based 2008 FBI name check provides valuable 

approach to screening for information and will continue to work 

national security concerns. with the FBI to improve the name check 

process. This recommendation has 

been fulfilled. 

Annual Report 

Recommendation 2007-04: 

FAQ List 

Adopt the frequently asked 

questions format used by 

Customs and Border Protection 

(CBP), incorporating a dynamic 

search feature on the Web site, 

rather than a static FAQ list. In 

addition, USCIS should provide 

a service on the Web site 

whereby customers can email a 

question and receive an answer 

within a short period of time. 

February 13, 

2008 

USCIS does not disagree with this 

recommendation. As stated in the 2007 

response, USCIS is currently working 

on new initiatives for the customer to 

submit inquiries via online capabilities. 

- 24 -
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Recommendation 30: 

Improvement of FOIA 

Operations 

October 5, 2006 

USCIS has implemented all the 

recommendations to the extent feasible. 

(Minor parts of Recommendations 13 

and 17 were not implemented, the 

former because it is not possible to link 

to a non-existent Vermont FOIA Web 

site; the latter because using registered 

mail, return receipt requested, for all 

adverse FOIA decisions would be costprohibitive. The essential portions of 

these two recommendations—linkage 

between existing FOIA Web sites and 

providing information on appeal 

procedures on adverse decisions—were 

implemented.) 

B2: Comments on other Recommendations 

Recommendation Response Date USCIS 

Comments 

Annual Report Recommendation 2008-08: 

Customer Service Systems 

Ensure that all systems used by customer service 

personnel to provide information to the public are 

consistent and accurate. September 30, 2008 

USCIS continues to 

work to ensure that 

all systems used by 

customer service 

personnel to 

provide 

information to the 

public are 

consistent and 

accurate. 

Annual Report Recommendation 2008-04: USCIS has 

Dissemination of Information procedures in place 

Standardize proactive dissemination of to disseminate 

information to all customer service avenues to 

ensure USCIS personnel can provide consistent September 30, 2008 information. The 

agency continues to 

and accurate information to customers. explore ways to 

improve the 

process. 

Annual Report Recommendation 2008-01: USCIS has 

Case Management System determined that the 

Implement a comprehensive and effective case SIMS pilot did not 

management system. USCIS should determine 

whether the Transformation Program Office September 30, 2008 have the 

capabilities to be 

(TPO) pilot has the necessary capabilities and, if implemented as an 

so, implement agency-wide. agency-wide case 

management 

- 25 -
 

 

 

system, and is 

completing a final 

pilot evaluation 

report. A new case 

management 

system will be 

developed and 

implemented as 

part of the 

transformation 

initiative. 

Annual Report Recommendation 2007-20: USCIS regularly 

Office Communication hosts in-person 

Expand the opportunities for vertical and conferences and 

horizontal communication among offices by meetings with 

supporting conferences focused on specific work subject matter 

issues and providing funds for travel of working experts. USCIS 

level staff to share best practices. February 13, 2008 will continue to 

provide 

opportunities for 

information to be 

communicated both 

vertically and 

horizontally. 

Annual Report Recommendation 2007-15: 

Information Technology Network Solutions USCIS is managing 

a careful balance 

(1) Ensure that a computer refresh does not between 

adversely impact local systems; 

February 13, 2008 

maintaining locally 

developed systems 

and placing an 

aggressive and 

rapid emphasis on 

improving the IT 

security posture. 

- 26 -
 

 

 

2) Make available to each local office software 

that is authorized to enable offices to continue to 

use previously created documents in those 

systems; and Some locally 

developed systems 

that were created 

without adequate IT 

safeguards are 

affected when 

February 13, 2008 necessary 

modifications to IT 

security are 

implemented. This 

does not occur 

when authorized 

software is updated. 

(3) Consider a long-term solution to the onsite The 2007 fee rule 

support issue, such as a central system. supports 

development of a 

February 13, 2008 viable central IT 

program that 

provides responsive 

service and better 

IT controls. 

Annual Report Recommendation 2007-12: 

Request for Evidence Issuance 

Work to improve the clarity of form instructions, 

the Ombudsman recommends that USCIS 

develop: 

(1) Clearer application instructions so that 

applicants provide the required documentation at 

the outset; 

February 13, 2008 

All instructions are 

reviewed for plainlanguage when a 

form is revised or 

reissued. 

Annual Report Recommendation 2007-02: 

Pending Cases 

Provide a clearer picture of the current backlog 

by providing information on the number of 

pending cases by form type with receipts that 

are: (1) less than 90 days; (2) less than 180 days; 

(3) less than 1 year; (4) less than 2 years; (5) less 

than 3 years; (6) less than 4 years; and (7) greater 

than 4 years. 

February 13, 2008 

Upon the launch of 

USCIS’s new Web 

site, customers will 

be able to identify 

their place in the 

process as well as 

the total number of 

applications 

pending at that 

same point. 

- 27 -
 

 

Annual Report Recommendation 2007-01: 

Transformation 

The Ombudsman recommends that the 

Transformation Program Office: 

(1) Publish transformation timelines, goals, and 

regular updates on the public USCIS Web site. 

The Ombudsman is concerned that 

transformation is proceeding largely without 

input from customers, Congress, and the public. 

The lack of transparency enables USCIS to 

modify deadlines and goals without producing 

meaningful results. 

February 13, 2008 

The transformation 

contract was 

recently awarded. 

Timelines and goals 

are currently being 

developed. 

B3: Recommendation Update 

Annual Report Recommendation 2007-11: Although USCIS initially agreed with this 

recommendation, the agency has reviewed the feasibility of implementation and does not 

think it is appropriate for the lockbox to automatically reject applications filed by those in 

removal proceedings. There are instances where an applicant who is in removal 

proceedings may be eligible to apply for an immigration benefit. 

B4: Implemented Recommendations 

USCIS appreciates the CISOMB recognizing that USCIS has implemented the following 

recommendations: 

Annual Report Recommendation 2008-06: Tier 1 and Tier 2 Exchange Program 

Annual Report Recommendation 2008-05: Web site Resources 

Annual Report Recommendation 2007-25: Form I-589 Redraft 

Annual Report Recommendation 2007-24: End the DORA Program 

Annual Report Recommendation 2007-23-2: Interview Training 

Annual Report Recommendation 2007-22: Personnel Recruitment and Development 

Annual Report Recommendation 2007-21: Supervisor Training 

Annual Report Recommendation 2007-19: Standardize Staffing Levels 

Annual Report Recommendation 2007-18-1: Expand Blended Training Approach 

Annual Report Recommendation 2007-18-2: Instructor Certification 

Annual Report Recommendation 2007-17: Career Paths 

Annual Report Recommendation 2007-16: Chief Human Capital Officer SES 

Annual Report Recommendation 2007-13: Fund Headquarters Staff Visits to the Field 

Annual Report Recommendation 2007-11-2: Notify Field Offices of Rejected 

Applications 

Annual Report Recommendation 2007-11-3: Implement Quality Review Measures 

Annual Report Recommendation 2007-10: Uniform Quality Assurance Training 

- 28 -
 

Annual Report Recommendation 2007-09: Aging Report of Fraud Investigations 

Annual Report Recommendation 2007-07: Premium Processing Cost Analysis 

Annual Report Recommendation 2007-06-2: Work With the FBI on Name Check Cases 

Formal Recommendation 32-2: Maintain Statistics on Deferred Action 

Formal Recommendation 28: Change of Address Online 

- 29 -