PROPOSED REFUGEE ADMISSIONS

FOR

FISCAL YEAR 2015

REPORT TO THE CONGRESS

SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF

THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

TO THE

COMMITTEES ON THE JUDICIARY

UNITED STATES SENATE

AND

UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

IN FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF

SECTIONS 207(d)(1) and (e)

OF THE

IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

 
i

INTRODUCTION

This Proposed Refugee Admissions for Fiscal Year 2015: Report to the 

Congress is submitted in compliance with Sections 207(d)(1) and (e) of the 

Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). The Act requires that before the start of 

the fiscal year and, to the extent possible, at least two weeks prior to consultations 

on refugee admissions, members of the Committees on the Judiciary of the Senate 

and the House of Representatives be provided with the following information:

(1) A description of the nature of the refugee situation;

(2) A description of the number and allocation of the refugees to be admitted

and an analysis of conditions within the countries from which they came;

(3) A description of the plans for their movement and resettlement and the 

estimated cost of their movement and resettlement;

(4) An analysis of the anticipated social, economic, and demographic impact 

of their admission to the United States; 1

(5) A description of the extent to which other countries will admit and assist 

in the resettlement of such refugees;

(6) An analysis of the impact of the participation of the United States in the 

resettlement of such refugees on the foreign policy interests of the United 

States; and

(7) Such additional information as may be appropriate or requested by such 

members.

This report contains information as required by Section 602(d) of the 

International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-292, October 27, 

1998, 112 Stat. 2787) (IRFA) about religious persecution of refugee populations 

eligible for consideration for admission to the United States. This report meets 

the reporting requirements of Section 305(b) of the North Korean Human Rights 

Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-333, October 18, 2004, 118 Stat. 1287) by 

providing information about specific measures taken to facilitate access to the 

United States refugee program for individuals who have fled “countries of 

particular concern” for violations of religious freedoms, identified pursuant to 

Section 402(b) of the IRFA.

 

i Detailed discussion of the anticipated social and economic impact, including secondary migration, of the

admission of refugees to the United States is being provided in the Report to the Congress of the Refugee

Resettlement Program, Office of Refugee Resettlement, Department of Health and Human Services.
ii

FOREWORD

On World Refugee Day, June 20, both President Obama and 

Secretary Kerry re-affirmed our nation’s commitment to helping refugees 

and our leading role in providing safe haven. This stance reflects our 

proud heritage as a land welcoming to immigrants. It also reflects a harsh 

reality. There are currently more refugees, asylum-seekers, and internally 

displaced persons than at any time since World War II. While starting life 

anew in the United States may be daunting, it also offers unparalleled hope. 

It is a chance not only to escape from violence and persecution but to start 

again. The assistance the American people provide helps newcomers find 

their footing and feel a part of their new communities. Refugees add to 

America’s vitality and diversity by making substantial contributions to our 

economic and cultural life. 

Resettlement in a third country is a solution for some of the world’s most 

vulnerable refugees, those who would face real danger if they tried to remain 

where they are or return to the countries they escaped. As a matter of principle, 

the USRAP offers resettlement to refugees regardless of their location, national 

origin, health status, occupational skills, or level of educational attainment. 

U.S. Arrivals Remain Strong

Refugee arrivals in FY 2014 will again come close to reaching the 

President’s authorized ceiling of 70,000. Close interagency coordination on 

security checks helped to make this possible because it allowed us to scrutinize 

and process referrals more carefully and efficiently. We also helped the UN High 

Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) enhance its capacity to refer refugees for 

resettlement which in turn helped our program reach its ceiling. We had expected 

15,000 refugees to arrive from Africa in 2014 but we are now on pace to exceed 

that. We will also welcome a large number of Iraqi refugees in 2014. Since 

2007, we have resettled more than 105,000 Iraqis, despite the challenges of 

processing refugees in Iraq and some neighboring countries. 

Congolese Resettlement

As the world’s leading resettlement country and chair of the Congolese 

Refugee Core Group, the United States will admit more than 3,000 Congolese 

refugees in FY 2014. In the coming years that number will rise steadily. We 

continue to work closely with UNHCR to help it resettle at least 50,000 

Congolese worldwide over the next 4-5 years. Most of these refugees are in 

camps in Uganda, Tanzania, Rwanda, and Burundi, and come originally from the 
iii

Kivus or Katanga in the Democratic Republic of 

the Congo. Domestically, we are chairing a 

Congolese working group, made up of 

representatives from state governments, 

nongovernmental organizations, and international 

organizations who assist with resettlement. Our 

goal is to better equip Congolese refugees to be 

resettled in the U.S., to identify additional 

resources and to help U.S. communities prepare to 

accept larger numbers of Congolese. 

Syrian Refugees

The refugee crisis caused by the conflict in 

Syria is the worst the world has witnessed in a 

generation with more than 2.9 million refugees in 

the region. More than 9 million people need 

assistance including 6.5 million displaced inside 

Syria. The U.S. government is deeply committed 

to assisting the Syrian people and has provided

more than $2 billion in humanitarian assistance 

since the start of the crisis, more than any other 

donor. While the vast majority of Syrians would 

prefer to return home when the conflict ends, we 

recognize that some remain extremely vulnerable 

in their country of asylum and would benefit from 

resettlement. UNHCR has announced that it aims 

to refer 30,000 Syrian refugees to all resettlement 

countries by the end of calendar year 2014. Those 

numbers will likely rise in 2015 and 2016. The 

United States has received more than 2,500 

referrals as of August 2014 and expects thousands 

more in the remainder of the year. We will begin 

to welcome those Syrians who are approved for 

U.S. resettlement to communities across the 

country in larger numbers in 2015.

Unaccompanied Minors from Central America

The number of unaccompanied children 

crossing the southwest border has risen exponentially. The Administration is 

taking a whole of government approach that addresses underlying causes of 

“Today I join people around the world in 

commemorating World Refugee Day. It is 

an opportunity to honor the resilience of 

those who flee violence and persecution 

and the dedication of those who help them.

The forces that shatter communities and 

uproot their residents are difficult to tame. 

This year we mark a grim milestone. Over 

51 million people are now refugees, 

asylum seekers, or internally displaced 

persons, according to the United Nations 

High Commissioner for Refugees. That is 

more than at any time since World War II.

The United States provides more 

humanitarian assistance to refugees than 

any other nation. In the last year alone, the 

generosity of the American people, and the 

dedication of those who deliver food, 

medicine, shelter, and other emergency 

assistance, have helped to save hundreds of 

thousands, perhaps millions of lives.

Our commitment does not end overseas. 

Some refugees simply cannot return home 

because the risk of violence and 

persecution is too great. The U.S. admits 

more refugees for permanent resettlement 

than any other nation. Last year nearly 

70,000 came to the United States and we 

expect to bring in the same number this 

year.

The ordeals refugees survive and the 

aspirations they hold resonate with us as 

Americans. This country was built by 

people who fled oppression and war, leapt 

at opportunity, and worked day and night 

to remake themselves in this new land. 

The refugees who arrive in the United 

States today continue this tradition, 

bringing fresh dreams and energy and 

renewing the qualities that help forge our 

national identity and make our country 

strong.”

President Barack Obama

June 20, 2014

World Refugee Day

Secretary John Kerry

June 20, 2013
iv

migration relating to economic prosperity, governance, and security. One 

element in our comprehensive strategy to reduce unlawful and dangerous 

migration to the United States is the planned establishment of in-country refugee 

programs for minors in Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala. The program 

would be open to certain qualifying lawfully present relatives in the United States 

to file for unmarried children under 21 who are still residing in their home 

country and who are eligible to be admitted to the United States as refugees. 

Improvements to Global Resettlement

Our efforts to convince more nations to 

resettle refugees continue to pay dividends. In 

recent years, countries without a history of 

resettling refugees have stepped forward and 

established programs. The list includes 

Switzerland, which has announced a regular 

resettlement program, and Japan, which has 

announced that its pilot program will become 

permanent next year. In 2013, a total of 27 

countries resettled refugees identified and referred 

by UNHCR. At least 23 countries have agreed to 

accept Syrian refugees referred by UNHCR, 

including a number of countries without regular 

resettlement programs. They will admit Syrians 

through a humanitarian admissions program. 

For several years the U.S. government has 

provided targeted financial support to UNHCR. 

One goal is to expand the resettlement capacity and 

infrastructure it can make available to all countries 

running resettlement programs. In the Great Lakes 

region of Africa in particular we have enabled 

UNHCR to hire more staff. They in turn have been 

able to refer more refugees to more countries. We 

have also funded two new interview facilities that 

all countries can use to screen refugees from the 

region. The U.S. chairs the Congolese Core 

Group, made up of countries that have agreed to 

resettle Congolese refugees and plays an active role 

in other core groups tasked with resettling 

additional high priority populations. 

“The dreams refugees harbor have special 

meaning for Americans. Even before our 

land was a nation, America was a haven for 

those seeking freedom from persecution, 

hunger, oppression, and war. Today, 

refugees continue to look to America for 

relief and opportunity. These refugees, 

many of whom arrive having lost 

everything, become some of the most 

resilient, entrepreneurial, and devoted 

citizens we have.

When I visited the UN’s Zaatari refugee 

camp in Jordan last year, I saw firsthand 

the value and importance of our work. 

Hundreds of thousands of Syrians – many 

women and children – live there in 

suspended animation, waiting for the 

opportunity to rebuild their lives. I met 

with some of the camp’s many residents. 

Their needs were simple: food, shelter, 

stability. But most of all, they want to live 

their lives with the dignity and respect that 

all people deserve.

That’s why I’m proud that the United 

States is the largest donor to humanitarian 

relief worldwide. Our humanitarian 

assistance has saved lives and eased 

suffering for 4.7 million people inside Syria 

and more than 2.8 million refugees in 

neighboring countries. We have also 

recently announced nearly $300 million in 

additional humanitarian assistance to help 

the people affected by the conflict in South 

Sudan. Beyond just dollars and programs, 

our efforts are assisting millions who have 

fled conflict and persecution in the Central 

African Republic, Burma, Afghanistan, and 

many other places around the world.”

Secretary John Kerry

June 20, 2014

World Refugee Day
v

Reuniting Families

In late 2012, the United States reinstated the Priority Three (P-3) family 

reunification program for spouses, unmarried children under 21, and parents of 

persons lawfully admitted to the United States as refugees or asylees. It had been 

suspended for four years after DNA testing uncovered widespread fraud. Since 

2012, we have received more than 2,000 P-3 applications for refugees in 50 

countries. We are processing them according to more stringent procedures, 

including DNA testing to verify parent-child relationships. In some countries 

relatives must register with UNHCR and/or the host government to obtain 

permission to exit for third country resettlement. Last year we encountered 

challenges in a number of processing locations where they did not meet this 

requirement. Accordingly, we have recently tightened the rules for individuals 

accepted for P-3 consideration, and in most locations will accept applications 

only for those who meet all relevant local registration requirements. 

Combatting Fraud in the Refugee Admissions Program

In 2014, we took additional measures to protect the refugee admissions 

program against fraud. The Department of State has established new guidelines 

for its worldwide network of Resettlement Support Centers to improve the way 

we screen and train staff and interpreters, control access points, manage electronic 

data, and communicate with applicants. The U.S. government is also working 

with UNHCR to safeguard refugee referral data by improving registration 

procedures and enhancing electronic screening of registration data to detect 

identity fraud.

Ensuring a Suitable Welcome

In FY 2014, to maintain quality reception and placement services for 

arriving refugees the Department of State continued to guarantee resettlement 

agencies a minimum level of funding, even during lulls caused when numbers 

dip, or referrals are delayed so staff and services will be available when needed. 

The Department expects to continue this funding mechanism in FY 2015.

Benefits and services for refugees include the Reception and Placement 

grant provided by the State Department, time-limited assistance programs (up to 

eight months from arrival) and social service programs (up to five years) funded 

by the Office of Refugee Resettlement at the Department of Health and Human 

Services (HHS/ORR). These programs help refugees find employment and 

become economically self-sufficient. They also encourage social integration. The 

State Department and HHS/ORR continue to work closely with receiving 

communities to give stakeholders the tools and information they need so that new 

arrivals can best benefit from the programs and services that are available to 
vi

them. Over the past year we have consulted with groups in Arizona, Colorado, 

Illinois, Maine, New York, Texas, Utah, and Wisconsin. ORR established 

regional offices in order to increase engagement and consultation with 

resettlement stakeholders. The Administration will continue to explore ways of 

sustaining a strong federal-state-community partnership and ensuring that 

refugees can integrate successfully. 

Planning for the Future

As we prepare to bring growing numbers of Congolese and Syrian refugees 

to the United States, we are simultaneously wrapping up longstanding 

resettlement programs for Burmese in Thailand and Bhutanese in Nepal. In 2014 

we continued to process the cases of the more than 5,000 Burmese in Thailand 

who submitted expressions of interest in resettlement in 2013. The last several 

thousand eligible Burmese will arrive in the United States in 2015. In Nepal, we 

worked with UNHCR to issue a last call for expressions of interest among 

Priority Two (P-2) eligible Bhutanese. Approximately 3,000 individuals 

registered their interest by the June 30 deadline and we will move these cases to 

completion while reducing our operations in Nepal. 

We continue to face challenges accessing refugee applicants in a variety of 

locations. In some countries, such as Syria, Yemen, and Eritrea, Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS) adjudicators have been unable to travel to interview 

applicants for several years. DHS-approved refugees in Syria continue to depart 

as their cases become fully cleared, and we have had applicants in Yemen, Iran, 

and Eritrea moved to a UNHCR Emergency Transit Center in Romania or 

Slovakia, but relatively small numbers benefit from this option due to capacity 

limitations. In Iraq, Lebanon, and Kenya, security concerns have hampered our 

ability to process applicants. In Chad, Ethiopia, and other countries, applicants are 

in extremely remote locations, and are hard and expensive to reach. We are 

constantly reviewing our operations to find efficient and creative ways to access 

larger numbers of vulnerable individuals in these locations for resettlement. 

In these and other ways we will continue to adapt to meet changing needs 

and keep our refugee resettlement program strong. With the support of Congress 

and the American people, refugee resettlement will continue to be a proud 

American tradition for many years to come. 
vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction i

Foreword ii

I. OVERVIEW OF U.S. REFUGEE POLICY 1

II. REFUGEE ADMISSIONS PROGRAM FOR FY 2015 5

Proposed Ceilings 5

Unallocated Reserve 6

Admissions Procedures 6

Eligibility Criteria 6

Priority 1: Individual Referrals 7

Priority 2: Group Referrals 8

FY 2015 Priority 2 Designations 9

Priority 3: Family Reunification Cases 11

FY 2015 Priority 3 Nationalities 13

Following to Join Reunification Cases 13

DHS/USCIS Refugee Adjudications 14

The Eligibility Determination 15

Background Checks 16

Processing Activities of the Department of State 16

Overseas Processing Services 16

Cultural Orientation 17

Transportation 18

Reception and Placement (R&P) 18

Office of Refugee Resettlement 19

III. REGIONAL PROGRAMS 22

Africa 23

Religious Freedom 25

Voluntary Repatriation 26

Local Integration 27

Third-Country Resettlement 29

FY 2014 U.S. Admissions 29

FY 2015 U.S. Resettlement Program 30
viii

East Asia 31

Religious Freedom 33

Voluntary Repatriation 35

Local Integration 35

Third-Country Resettlement 35

FY 2014 U.S. Admissions 36

FY 2015 U.S. Resettlement Program 36

Europe and Central Asia 37

Religious Freedom 39

Voluntary Repatriation 40

Local Integration 40

Third-Country Resettlement 41

FY 2014 U.S. Admissions 41

FY 2015 U.S. Resettlement Program 41

Latin America and the Caribbean 42

Religious Freedom 43

Voluntary Repatriation 44

Local Integration 44

Third and In-Country Resettlement 45

FY 2014 U.S. Admissions 46

FY 2015 U.S. Resettlement Program 46

Near East and South Asia 47

Religious Freedom 49

Voluntary Repatriation 51

Local Integration 53

Third-Country Resettlement 55

FY 2014 U.S. Admissions 57

FY 2015 U.S. Resettlement Program 57

IV. DOMESTIC IMPACT OF REFUGEE ADMISSIONS 59
ix

LIST OF TABLES

Page

I. Refugee Admissions in FY 2013 and FY 2014, 

Proposed Refugee Admissions by Region for FY 2015 5

II. Proposed FY 2015 Regional Ceilings by Priority 22

III. Refugee Arrivals by Country of Origin, FY 2013 60

IV. Median Age and Gender of Refugee Arrivals, FY 2013 62

V. Select Age Categories of Refugee Arrivals, FY 2013 63

VI. Refugee Arrivals by State of Initial Resettlement, FY 2013 64

VII. Estimated Funding of Refugee Processing, Movement, and 

Resettlement FY 2014 and FY 2015 66

VIII. UNHCR Resettlement Statistics by Resettlement Country, 

CY 2013 68
1

I. OVERVIEW OF U.S. REFUGEE POLICY 

At the end of 2013, the estimated refugee population worldwide stood at 

16.7 million, with 11.7 million under the mandate of the United Nations High 

Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). The United States actively supports

efforts to provide protection, assistance, and durable solutions to these refugees, 

as these measures fulfill our humanitarian interests and further our foreign policy 

and national security interests. Under the authority of the Migration and Refugee 

Assistance Act of 1962, as amended, the United States contributes to the 

programs of UNHCR, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), the 

International Organization for Migration (IOM), the United Nations Relief and 

Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), and other 

international and non-governmental organizations that provide protection and 

assistance to refugees, internally displaced persons (IDPs), victims of conflict, 

stateless persons, and other vulnerable migrants. These contributions are used to 

address the legal and physical protection needs of refugees and to furnish basic 

assistance such as water, sanitation, food, health care, shelter, education, and 

other services. The United States monitors these programs to ensure the most 

effective use of resources, maximizing humanitarian impact for the beneficiaries. 

The United States and UNHCR recognize that most refugees desire safe, 

voluntary return to their homeland. During FY 2014, the United States continued 

to support voluntary repatriation programs around the world. Refugee 

repatriation operations brought refugees home to Afghanistan, Cote d’Ivoire, the 

Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), and Sri Lanka. These operations were 

carried out to protect returning refugees as well as to help them contribute to the 

stabilization, reconstruction, and development of their home countries.

Where opportunities for return remain elusive, the United States and 

partners pursue self-sufficiency and temporary, indefinite, or permanent local 

integration in countries of asylum. The Department of State encourages host 

governments to protect refugees and allow them to integrate into local 

communities. The State Department further promotes local integration by 

funding programs to enhance refugee self-sufficiency and support communitybased social services. Groups that may avail themselves of opportunities for local 

integration include Afghans in India, Angolans in Zambia, Burundians in 

Tanzania, Eritreans in Sudan, Liberians and Sierra Leoneans in seven countries 

across West Africa, and Colombians in Ecuador, Costa Rica, Panama and 

Venezuela.
2

UNHCR estimates that there are 10 million people worldwide who are not 

recognized nationals of any state and are, therefore, legally or de facto stateless. 

Without recognized citizenship in any country, many stateless persons exist in 

refugee-like situations, unable to claim rights and denied even the most basic 

protections of law. The United States has supported UNHCR’s efforts to prevent 

and reduce statelessness, including addressing gaps in citizenship laws, 

eliminating provisions that discriminate against women, and promoting fair 

application of those laws. U.S. contributions to UNHCR’s core budget support 

efforts to prevent and address statelessness in Burma, the Dominican Republic, 

Cote d’Ivoire, Nepal, Sudan, Turkmenistan, and elsewhere. In addition, the 

Department of State seeks to use the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program 

(USRAP) to demonstrate leadership and encourage other countries to do more to 

help stateless people and refugees stuck in protracted situations. This approach is 

reflected in the current resettlement of Rohingya refugees, as well as in past 

resettlement of Meskhetian Turks. 

The United States and UNHCR recognize that resettlement in third 

countries is a vital tool for providing refugees protection and/or durable 

solutions in some particularly difficult cases. For some refugees, resettlement 

is the best, and perhaps the only, alternative. Stateless refugees who arrive in 

the United States for resettlement not only find a durable solution to their 

displacement, but are also placed on a path that will afford the opportunity to

naturalize and resolve their stateless status.

For more than a decade, the U.S. government has provided financial 

support to expand and improve UNHCR’s resettlement capacity, principally by 

providing staff and constructing facilities. As a result, UNHCR has substantially 

increased referrals to the United States and other resettlement countries. We plan 

to continue to work with UNHCR and consult with host governments on group 

referrals. We will continue to assess resettlement needs and allow qualified 

NGOs to refer refugee applicants to the program.

The United States has also supported UNHCR’s efforts to expand the 

number of countries active in resettlement. In 2013, UNHCR referred refugees to 

27 countries for resettlement consideration. Over 90 percent were referred to the 

United States, Australia, and Canada. Smaller numbers of referrals were made to 

Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, 

Germany, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, 

Portugal, Republic of Korea, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Uruguay, 

and the United Kingdom. 
3

While the overall number of refugees referred by UNHCR and the 

percentage resettled by various countries fluctuate from year to year, the United

States aims to ensure at least 50 percent of all refugees referred by UNHCR 

worldwide are considered for resettlement in the United States, depending on the 

availability of funds. Some 67 percent of UNHCR-referred refugees who were 

resettled in 2013, were resettled in the United States (see Table VIII).

The foreign policy and humanitarian interests of the United States are often 

advanced by addressing refugee issues in first asylum and resettlement countries. 

In some cases, the United States has been able to use its leadership position in 

resettlement to promote and secure other durable solutions for refugees, or 

advance other human rights or foreign policy objectives. The United States is by 

far the largest single donor to UNHCR, providing over $1.05 billion in FY 2013. 

During the past few years, U.S. resettlement efforts in Africa, the Middle East, 

and East Asia have helped energize efforts by UNHCR and other countries to 

ensure that first asylum is maintained for larger refugee populations or that local 

integration or third country resettlement are options offered to those in need. In 

certain locations, the prompt resettlement of politically sensitive cases has helped 

defuse regional tensions. 

During its history, the USRAP has responded to changing circumstances. 

The end of the Cold War dramatically altered the context in which the USRAP 

operated. The program shifted its focus away from large groups concentrated in a 

few locations (primarily refugees from Vietnam, the former Soviet Union, and the 

former Yugoslavia) and began to admit refugees representing over 50 

nationalities per year. Interviews of refugees by American officials from the 

Department of Homeland Security’s U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 

(USCIS) are often conducted in remote locations and are geared toward 

populations in greatest need of third country resettlement opportunities.

While maintaining the United States’ leadership role in humanitarian 

protection, an integral part of this mission is to ensure that refugee resettlement 

opportunities go to those who are eligible for such protection and do not present a 

risk to the safety and security of our country. Accordingly, the USRAP is 

committed to deterring and detecting fraud among those seeking to resettle in the 

United States and continues to employ the most rigorous security measures 

possible to protect against threats to our national security.

Refugees resettled in the United States enrich our nation. The USRAP is 

premised on the idea that refugees should become economically self-sufficient as 

quickly as possible. The Department of State works domestically with agencies 

participating in the Reception and Placement (R&P) program to ensure that 

refugees receive services in the first thirty to ninety days after arrival in 
4

accordance with established standards. During and after the initial resettlement 

period, the Office of Refugee Resettlement at the Department of Health and 

Human Services (HHS/ORR) provides leadership, technical assistance, and 

funding to states, the District of Columbia, and nonprofit organizations to help 

refugees become self-sufficient and integrated into U.S. society. ORR programs 

use formula and discretionary grants to provide cash and medical assistance, 

employment and training programs, and other services to newly arriving and 

recently arrived refugees. Moreover, upon arrival, refugees are Americans in 

waiting. Refugees are immediately eligible for lawful employment and after one 

year, are required to apply for adjustment of status to lawful permanent resident. 

Five years after admission, a refugee who has been granted lawful permanent 

resident status is eligible to apply for citizenship.

A number of factors create challenges for resettlement agencies striving to 

meet the needs of refugees in the program. The refugee population is ever more 

linguistically diverse, with wide-ranging educational and employment histories. 

To better prepare refugees for arrival in the United States, the USRAP continues 

to improve overseas cultural orientation, including thorough curricula review and 

teacher training. In 2013, we determined via two pilot rounds of English as a 

Second Language classes for some refugees in Kenya, Thailand, and Nepal that 

the classes provided basic English competency and promoted continued language 

learning after arrival in the United States. As a result, we began to fund our 

Resettlement Support Center for Africa to provide ESL to some Congolese prior 

to resettlement in the United States. We intend to continue this funding in 2015.
5

REFUGEE ADMISSIONS PROGRAM FOR FY 2015

PROPOSED CEILINGS

TABLE I

REFUGEE ADMISSIONS IN FY 2013 AND FY 2014,

PROPOSED REFUGEE ADMISSIONS BY REGION FOR FY 20152

REGION

FY 2013

ACTUAL 

ARRIVALS

FY 2014

CEILING

FY 2014

PROJECTED 

ARRIVALS

PROPOSED 

FY2015

CEILING

Africa 15,980 15,000 15,800 17,000

East Asia 16,537 14,000 14,500 13,000

Europe and Central Asia 580 1,000 900 1,000

Latin America/Caribbean 4,439 5,000 4,300 4,000

Near East/South Asia 32,389 33,000 34,000 33,000

Regional Subtotal 69,925 68,000 69,500 68,000

Unallocated Reserve 2,000 2,000

Total 69,925 70,000 69,500 70,000

Generally, to be considered a refugee, a person must be outside his or her 

country of nationality or, if stateless, outside his or her country of last habitual 

residence. Under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) § 101(a)(42)(B), 

however, the President may specify circumstances under which individuals who 

are within their countries of nationality or last habitual residence may be 

considered a refugee for purposes of admission to the United States. The FY 

2015 proposal recommends continuing such in-country processing for specified 

persons in Iraq, Cuba, Eurasia and the Baltics, and commencing such in-country 

processing for specified persons in Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala. 

Persons for whom resettlement is requested by a U.S. ambassador in any location 

in the world may also be considered, with the understanding that they will only be 

referred to the USRAP following Department of State consultation with USCIS at 

the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

 

2

These proposed figures assume enactment by Congress of the President’s Budget levels related to the U.S. 

Refugee Admissions Program elements.
6

Unallocated Reserve

This proposal includes 2,000 unallocated admissions numbers to be used if 

needed for additional refugee admissions from any region. The unallocated 

numbers would only be used following notification to Congress.

ADMISSIONS PROCEDURES

Eligibility Criteria

The Department of State’s Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration 

(PRM) is responsible for coordinating and managing the USRAP. A critical part 

of this responsibility is determining which individuals or groups from among the 

millions of refugees worldwide will have access to U.S. resettlement 

consideration. PRM coordinates within the Department of State, as well as with 

DHS/USCIS and other agencies, in carrying out this responsibility.

Section 207(a)(3) of the INA states that the USRAP shall allocate admissions 

among refugees “of special humanitarian concern to the United States in 

accordance with a determination made by the President after appropriate 

consultation.” Which individuals are “of special humanitarian concern” to the 

United States for the purpose of refugee resettlement consideration is determined 

through the USRAP priority system. There are currently three priorities or 

categories of cases:

 Priority 1 – Individual cases referred to the program by virtue of their 

circumstances and apparent need for resettlement;

 Priority 2 – Groups of cases designated as having access to the program 

by virtue of their circumstances and apparent need for resettlement;

 Priority 3 – Individual cases from designated nationalities granted 

access for purposes of reunification with anchor family members 

already in the United States.

(Note: Refugees resettled in the United States may also seek the admission of 

spouses and unmarried children under 21 who are still abroad by filing a 

“Following to Join” petition, which obviates the need for a separate refugee claim 

adjudication. This option is described in more detail in the discussion of 

Following to Join cases below.)
7

Access to the program under one of the above-listed processing priorities 

does not mean an applicant meets the statutory definition of “refugee” or is 

admissible to the United States under the INA. Applicants who are eligible for 

access within the established priorities are presented to DHS/USCIS officers for 

interview. The ultimate determination as to whether an applicant can be admitted 

as a refugee is made by DHS/USCIS in accordance with criteria set forth in the 

INA and various security protocols. 

Although the access categories to the USRAP are referred to as “processing 

priorities,” it is important to note that entering the program under a certain 

priority does not establish precedence in the order in which cases will be 

processed. Once cases are established as eligible for access under one of the three 

processing priorities, they all undergo the same processing steps. 

PRIORITY 1 – INDIVIDUAL REFERRALS

Priority 1 (P-1) allows consideration of refugee claims from persons of any 

nationality3, usually with compelling protection needs, for whom resettlement 

appears to be the appropriate durable solution. Priority 1 cases are identified and 

referred to the program by UNHCR, a U.S. Embassy, or a designated NGO. 

UNHCR, which has the international mandate worldwide to provide protection to 

refugees, has historically referred the vast majority of cases under this priority. 

Some NGOs providing humanitarian assistance in locations where there are large 

concentrations of refugees have also undergone training by PRM and 

DHS/USCIS and have been designated eligible to provide Priority 1 referrals. 

Process for Priority 1 Individual Referral Applications

Priority 1 referrals from UNHCR and NGOs are generally submitted to the 

appropriate Regional Refugee Coordinator, who forwards the referrals to the 

appropriate Resettlement Support Center (RSC) for case processing and 

scheduling of the DHS/USCIS interview. PRM’s Office of Admissions reviews 

embassy referrals for completeness and may consult with DHS in considering 

these referrals. 

A U.S. ambassador may make a Priority 1 referral for persons still in their 

country of origin if the ambassador determines that such cases are in need of 

exceptional treatment and the Departments of State (PRM) and Homeland 

Security (DHS/USCIS) concur. In some cases, a Department of State request to 

DHS/USCIS for parole may be a more appropriate option.

 

3

Referrals of North Koreans and Palestinians require State Department and DHS/USCIS concurrence before they 

may be granted access to the USRAP.
8

PRIORITY 2 – GROUP REFERRALS

Priority 2 (P-2) includes specific groups (within certain nationalities, clans 

or ethnic groups, sometimes in specified locations) identified by the Department 

of State in consultation with DHS/USCIS, NGOs, UNHCR, and other experts as 

being in need of resettlement. Some Priority 2 groups are processed in their 

country of origin. The process of identifying the group and its characteristics 

includes consideration of whether the group is of special humanitarian concern to 

the United States and whether members of the group will likely be able to qualify 

for admission as refugees under U.S. law. Groups may be designated as Priority 

2 during the course of the year as circumstances dictate, and the need for 

resettlement arises. PRM plays the coordinating role for all group referrals to the 

USRAP. 

There are two distinct models of Priority 2 access to the program: open 

access and predefined group access, normally upon the recommendation of 

UNHCR. Under both models, Priority 2 designations are made based on shared 

characteristics that define the group. In general, the possession of these 

characteristics is the reason the group has been persecuted in the past or faces 

persecution in the future.

The open-access model for Priority 2 group referrals allows individuals to 

seek access to the program on the basis of meeting designated criteria. To 

establish an open-access Priority 2 group, PRM, in consultation with 

DHS/USCIS, and (as appropriate) with UNHCR and others, defines the specific 

criteria for access. Once the designation is in place, applicants may approach the 

program at any of the processing locations specified as available for the group to 

begin the application process. Applicants must demonstrate that they meet 

specified criteria to establish eligibility for access.

The open-access model has functioned well in the in-country programs, 

including the long-standing programs in Eurasia and the Baltics, and in Cuba. It 

was also used successfully for Vietnamese for nearly thirty years (1980-2009), 

Bosnian refugees during the 1990s, and is now in use for Iranian religious 

minorities and Iraqis with links to the United States. 

The RSCs responsible for handling open-access Priority 2 applications, 

working under the direction of PRM, make a preliminary determination as to 

whether the applicants qualify for access and should be presented to DHS/USCIS 

for interview. Applicants who clearly do not meet the access requirements are 

“screened out” prior to DHS/USCIS interview.
9

In contrast to an open-access group, a predefined group designation is 

normally based on a UNHCR recommendation that lays out eligibility criteria that 

should apply to individuals in a specific location. Once PRM, in consultation 

with DHS/USCIS has established the access eligibility criteria for the group, the 

referring entity (usually UNHCR) provides the bio data of eligible refugee 

applicants for processing. This type of group referral is advantageous in 

situations in which the intensive labor required to generate individual referrals 

would be impracticable, potentially harmful to applicants due to delays, or 

counterproductive. Often, predefined groups are composed of persons with 

similar persecution claims. The predefined group referral process saves steps and 

can conserve scarce resources, particularly for UNHCR. In recent years, 

predefined groups have included certain Burmese in Thailand, certain Bhutanese 

in Nepal, and certain Congolese in Rwanda. Predefined group referrals with 

clear, well-defined eligibility criteria and several methods for cross-checking 

group membership can serve as a fraud deterrent as well, preventing non-group 

members from gaining access to the USRAP by falsely claiming group 

membership. It can also speed the resettlement process in cases where immediate 

protection concerns are present.

FY 2015 Priority 2 Designations

In-country processing programs

The following ongoing programs that process individuals still in their 

country of origin under Priority 2 group designations will continue in FY 2015:

Eurasia and the Baltics

This Priority 2 designation applies to Jews, Evangelical Christians, and Ukrainian 

Catholic and Orthodox religious adherents identified in the Lautenberg 

Amendment, Public Law No. 101-167, § 599D, 103 Stat. 1261 (1989) (codified at 

8 U.S.C. § 1157) as amended (“Lautenberg Amendment”), with close family in 

the United States. With annual renewal of the Lautenberg Amendment, these 

individuals are considered under a reduced evidentiary standard for establishing a 

well-founded fear of persecution. 

Cuba

Included in this Priority 2 program are human rights activists, members of 

persecuted religious minorities, former political prisoners, forced-labor 

conscripts, and persons deprived of their professional credentials or subjected to 

other disproportionately harsh or discriminatory treatment resulting from their 

perceived or actual political or religious beliefs.
10

Iraqis Associated with the United States

Under various Priority 2 designations, including those set forth in the Refugee 

Crisis in Iraq Act, employees of the U.S. Government, a U.S. government-funded 

contractor or grantee, U.S. media or U.S. NGOs working in Iraq, and certain 

family members of such employees, as well as beneficiaries of approved I-130 

(immigrant visa) petitions, are eligible for refugee processing in Iraq. 

The following planned program that would process individuals still in their 

country of origin under a Priority 2 group designation may be launched in FY 

2015:

Minors in Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala 

Under this planned new P-2 program, certain lawfully present qualifying relatives

in the United States could request access to a refugee interview for an unmarried 

child under 21 in his/her country of origin. 

Groups of Humanitarian Concern outside the Country of Origin 

The following Priority 2 groups are already designated and, in most cases, 

undergoing processing with significant arrivals anticipated during FY 2014. 

(Additional Priority 2 groups may be designated over the course of the year.)

Ethnic Minorities and others from Burma in camps in Thailand

Under this existing Priority 2 designation, individuals who have fled Burma, are 

registered in nine refugee camps along the Thai/Burma border, are identified by 

UNHCR as in need of resettlement, and expressed interest prior to January 2014 

(depending on the location), are eligible for processing.

Ethnic Minorities from Burma in Malaysia

Under this Priority 2 designation, ethnic minorities from Burma who are 

recognized by UNHCR as refugees in Malaysia and identified as being in need of 

resettlement are eligible for processing. 

Bhutanese in Nepal

Under this existing Priority 2 designation, Bhutanese refugees registered by 

UNHCR in camps in Nepal, identified as in need of resettlement, and expressed 

interest prior to June 30, 2014, are eligible for processing. 
11

Iranian Religious Minorities

Under this Priority 2 designation, Iranian members of certain religious minorities 

are eligible for processing and are considered under a reduced evidentiary 

standard for establishing a well-founded fear of persecution, pursuant to annual 

renewal of the Lautenberg Amendment as amended in 2004 by Sec. 213 of Title

II, Division E, of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2004, P.L. 108-199, 118 

Stat. 3 (“the Specter Amendment”). 

Iraqis Associated with the United States 

Under various Priority 2 designations, including those set forth in the Refugee 

Crisis in Iraq Act, employees of the U.S. government, a U.S. government-funded 

contractor or grantee, U.S. media or U.S. NGOs working in Iraq, and certain 

family members of such employees, as well as beneficiaries of approved I-130 

(immigrant visa) petitions, are eligible for refugee processing. This program is 

operating in Jordan and Egypt, in addition to the in-country program in Iraq.

Congolese in Rwanda

Under this existing Priority 2 designation, certain Congolese refugees in Rwanda 

who were verifiably registered in 1997 and identified as in need of resettlement 

are eligible for processing. 

PRIORITY 3 – FAMILY REUNIFICATION 

The Priority 3 (P-3) category affords USRAP access to members of 

designated nationalities who have immediate family members in the United States 

who initially entered as refugees or were granted asylum. At the beginning of 

each fiscal year, PRM, in consultation with DHS/USCIS, establishes the list of 

nationalities eligible for processing under this priority. The PRM Assistant 

Secretary may modify the list during the year, in consultation with DHS/USCIS, 

but additions or deletions are generally made to coincide with the fiscal year.

Inclusion on the P-3 list represents a finding by PRM that the nationality is 

of special humanitarian concern to the United States for the purpose of familyreunification refugee processing. Eligible nationalities are selected following 

careful review of several factors. UNHCR’s annual assessment of refugees in 

need of resettlement, provides insight into ongoing refugee situations, which 

could create the need for family-reunification processing. In addition, 

prospective or ongoing repatriation efforts and U.S. foreign policy interests must 

be weighed in determining which nationalities should be eligible.
12

The P-3 program has undergone significant changes in recent years. In 

order to qualify for access under the P-3 program, an applicant must be outside 

of his or her country of origin, be registered or have legal status in the country of 

asylum (with some exceptions), have had an Affidavit of Relationship (AOR) 

filed on his or her behalf by an eligible “anchor” relative in the United States 

during a period in which the nationality was included on the eligibility list, and 

have been cleared for onward processing by the DHS/USCIS Refugee Access 

Verification Unit (RAVU).

Since the P-3 program resumed in October 15, 2012, after a suspension 

period due to fraud concerns, the AOR has been an official Department of State 

form (DS-7656). The form contains new language about penalties for committing 

fraud, and alerts filers that DNA evidence of certain claimed biological parentchild relationships will be required in order to gain access to a USCIS interview 

for refugee admission to the United States through the P-3 program. As of June 

30, we have received more than 2,000 AORs that are in various stages of 

processing. We anticipate that P-3 arrivals to the United States will begin in 

FY2015. 

The following family members of the U.S.-based anchor are qualified for 

P-3 access: spouses, unmarried children under 21, and/or parents. Qualifying 

anchors are persons who were admitted to the United States as refugees or were 

granted asylum, including persons who are lawful permanent residents or U.S. 

citizens who initially were admitted to the United States as refugees or were 

granted asylum. The anchor relative must be at least 18 years of age at the time 

the AOR is filed and must file the AOR within 5 years of the date the anchor 

entered the U.S. as a refugee or was granted asylum.

In addition to the qualifying family members of a U.S.-based anchor listed 

above, the qualifying family member’s spouse and unmarried children under 21 

may derive refugee status from the principal applicant for refugee status. On a 

case-by-case basis, an individual may be added to a qualifying family member’s 

P-3 case if that individual:

1) lived in the same household as the qualifying family member in the 

country of nationality or, if stateless, last habitual residence; AND

2) was part of the same economic unit as the qualifying family member in 

the country of nationality or, if stateless, last habitual residence; AND

3) demonstrates exceptional and compelling humanitarian circumstances 

that justify inclusion on the qualifying family member’s case.
13

These individuals “are not “spouses” or “children”, under INA 

207(c)(2)(A)” and thus cannot derive their refugee status from the Principal 

Applicant. They must, therefore, independently establish that they qualify as a 

refugee.

FY 2015 Priority 3 Nationalities

P-3 processing is available to individuals of the following nationalities:

Afghanistan 

Bhutan

Burma

Burundi

Central African Republic

Colombia

Cuba

Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK)

Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC)

El Salvador

Eritrea

Ethiopia

Guatemala

Haiti

Honduras

Iran

Iraq

Mali

Somalia

South Sudan

Sri Lanka

Sudan

Syria

Uzbekistan

FOLLOWING-TO-JOIN FAMILY REUNIFICATION PETITIONS

Under 8 CFR Section 207.7, a principal refugee admitted to the United 

States may request following-to-join benefits for his or her spouse and/or 

unmarried children under the age of 21 who were not previously granted refugee 

status. Once in the United States, and within two years of admission, the refugee 
14

may file a Form I-730 Refugee/Asylee Relative Petition4 with DHS/USCIS for 

each eligible family member. If the Form I-730 petition is approved by 

DHS/USCIS (signifying adequate proof of eligibility based on a file review), the 

National Visa Center then forwards the petition to the embassy or consulate 

nearest to the location of the beneficiary for travel eligibility. 

Cases gaining access to the USRAP through an approved I-730 petition are 

interviewed by DHS/USCIS or consular officers to verify the relationships 

claimed in the petition, as well as to examine any applicable bars to status and 

admissibility to the United States. The beneficiaries are not required to 

demonstrate persecution claims, as they derive their status from the refugee 

relative in the United States who filed the petition. Beneficiaries of I-730 

petitions may be processed within their country of origin or in other locations. 

Anchor relatives in the United States may file an I-730 Refugee/Asylee

Relative Petition and seek Priority 3 access (if eligible) simultaneously. In some 

cases, the I-730 petition will be the only option as the family members are still in 

their country of origin. It is also important to note that the I-730 or “follow-tojoin” process does not allow the relative in the United States to petition for 

parents as the P-3 process does.

DHS/USCIS REFUGEE ADJUDICATIONS

Section 207(c) of the INA grants the Secretary of the Department of 

Homeland Security authority to admit, at his/her discretion, any refugee who is 

not firmly resettled in a third country, who is determined to be of special 

humanitarian concern, and who is admissible to the United States. The authority 

to determine eligibility for refugee status has been delegated to USCIS. 

Beginning in FY 2006, DHS/USCIS restructured the Refugee Affairs Division 

and established the Refugee Corps, a specially trained cadre of officers dedicated 

to adjudicating applications for refugee status. The Refugee Corps provides 

DHS/USCIS with the necessary resources and flexibility to respond to an 

increasingly diversified refugee admissions program. Each quarter of the fiscal 

year, on average, USCIS deploys approximately 100 Refugee Officers, 

Supervisory Refugee Officers, and fingerprinters to 12-16 locations around the 

world to interview refugee applicants. DHS/USCIS has also substantially 

enhanced its security vetting, anti-fraud, and training capacity related to refugee 

processing.

 

4

This petition is used to file for the relatives of both refugees and asylees, also known as Visa 93 and Visa 92 

cases respectively. The Refugee Admissions Program handles only Visa 93 cases, which are counted within the 

annual refugee admissions ceiling. Visa 92 cases are not considered to be refugee admissions cases and are not 

counted in the number of refugees admitted annually.
15

The Eligibility Determination

In order to be approved as a refugee, an applicant must meet the refugee 

definition contained in § 101(a)(42) of the INA. That section provides that a 

refugee is a person who is outside his or her country of nationality or last habitual 

residence and is unable or unwilling to return to that country because of 

persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, 

nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. As 

mentioned above, the President may specify special circumstances under which a 

person can meet the refugee definition when he or she is still within the country 

of origin. The definition excludes a person who has ordered, incited, assisted, or 

otherwise participated in persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, 

membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. Further, an 

applicant who has been “firmly resettled” in a third country may not be admitted 

as a refugee under INA Section207. Applicants are also subject to various 

statutory grounds of inadmissibility, including criminal, security, and public 

health grounds, some of which may be waived or from which applicants may be 

exempted.

The grounds of inadmissibility that apply to refugee applicants include the 

broad terrorism-related inadmissibility grounds (TRIG) at Section 212(a)(3)(B) of 

the INA. Beginning in 2005, the Departments of Homeland Security, State, and 

Justice began to exercise a discretionary Secretarial authority to exempt certain 

categories of refugee applicants from TRIG inadmissibility based on a 

determination that they did not represent a threat to the United States and 

otherwise merited an exemption for humanitarian purposes. As of June 2014, 

more than 12,700 TRIG exemptions have been granted to refugee applicants.

5

A DHS/USCIS officer conducts a non-adversarial, face-to-face interview 

of each refugee applicant designed to elicit information about the applicant’s 

claim for refugee status and any grounds of ineligibility. The officer asks 

questions about the applicant’s experiences in the country of origin, including 

problems and fears about returning (or remaining), as well as questions 

concerning the applicant’s activities, background, and criminal history. The 

officer also considers evidence about conditions in the country of origin and 

assesses the applicant’s credibility and claim. 

Background Checks

 

5

Over 6,600 of these exemptions pertained to Burmese applicants who had associations with groups that met the 

statutory definition of an undesignated “terrorist organization” in Section 212(a)(3)(B). Approximately5,580 of 

the exemptions related to applicants who provided material support to a terrorist organization under duress – for 

example, Iraqi applicants who paid a ransom for a kidnapped family member.
16

Refugee applicants of all nationalities are required to undergo background 

security checks. Security checks include biographic name checks for all refugee 

applicants and biometric (fingerprint) checks for refugee applicants aged 14 to 79. 

PRM, through its overseas Resettlement Support Centers, initiates required 

biographic name checks, while USCIS is responsible for collecting biometric data 

for screening. Biographic and biometric information is vetted against a broad 

array of law enforcement, intelligence community, and other relevant databases to 

help confirm identity, to check for any criminal or other derogatory information 

(including watchlist information), and to identify information that could inform 

lines of questioning during the interview. Refugee applicants must clear all 

required security checks prior to final approval of their application.

In late 2010, the USRAP implemented an enhanced security check 

requirement for all refugee applicants. While implementing the enhanced check 

was critical to strengthening the integrity of the program, refugee admissions 

were disrupted in FY 2011 and FY 2012. Interagency coordination and 

processing procedures were improved, however, resulting in increased refugee 

admissions levels beginning in May 2012. Admissions levels continued at these 

higher levels in FY 2013 and reached 99.9% of the ceiling set by Presidential 

Determination.

PROCESSING ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE

Overseas Processing Services

In most processing locations, PRM engages an NGO, an international 

organization (IO), or U.S. embassy contractors to manage a Resettlement Support 

Center (RSC) that assists in the processing of refugees for admission to the 

United States. RSC staff pre-screen applicants to determine preliminarily if they 

qualify for one of the applicable processing priorities and to prepare cases for 

DHS/USCIS adjudication. The RSCs assist applicants in completing 

documentary requirements and schedule DHS/USCIS refugee eligibility 

interviews. If an applicant is conditionally approved for resettlement, RSC staff 

guide the refugee through post-adjudication steps, including obtaining medical 

screening exams and attending cultural orientation programs. The RSC obtains 

sponsorship assurances and, once all required steps are completed, refers the case 

to IOM for transportation to the United States.
17

In FY 2014, NGOs (Church World Service, Hebrew Immigrant Aid 

Society, and International Rescue Committee) worked under cooperative 

agreements with PRM as RSCs at locations in Austria (covering Austria only), 

Kenya (covering sub-Saharan Africa), and Thailand (covering East Asia). 

International organizations and NGOs (IOM and the International Catholic 

Migration Commission) support refugee processing activities based in Ecuador, 

Jordan, Russia, Nepal, and Turkey covering Latin America, the Middle East, 

South and Central Asia, and Europe. The U.S. Department of State supports 

refugee processing in Havana, Cuba.

Cultural Orientation

The Department of State strives to ensure that refugees who are accepted 

for admission to the United States are prepared for the profound life changes they 

will experience by providing cultural orientation programs prior to departure for 

the United States. It is critical that refugees arrive with a realistic idea of what 

their new lives will be like, what services will be available to them, and what their 

responsibilities will be.

Every refugee family receives Welcome to the United States, a resettlement 

guidebook developed with contributions from refugee resettlement workers, 

resettled refugees, and government officials. The 2012 edition is available in 

eight languages: Arabic, Burmese, Chin, English, Karen, Kinyarwanda, Nepali, 

and Somali. The previous (2007) edition is still available in 16 

languages: Albanian, Amharic, Arabic, Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian, English, Farsi, 

French, Karen, Kirundi, Nepali, Russian, Somali, Spanish, Swahili, Tigrinya, and 

Vietnamese. Through this book, refugees have access to accurate information 

about the initial resettlement period before they arrive. The Welcome to the 

United States refugee orientation video was also revised in 2012 and is available 

in eight languages: Arabic, Burmese, Chin, English, Karen, Kinyarwanda, Nepali, 

and Somali. The 2004 version of the video is available in 13 languages: Arabic, 

English, Farsi, Hmong, Karen, Karenni, Kirundi, Nepali, Russian, Somali, 

Spanish, Swahili, and Tigrinya.

In addition, the Department of State funds one- to five-day pre-departure 

orientation classes for eligible refugees at sites throughout the world. In an effort 

to further bridge the information gap for certain groups, brief video presentations 

featuring the experience of recently resettled refugees of the same ethnic group 

are made available to refugee applicants overseas. Groups featured include 

refugees from Bhutan, Burma, Cuba, Darfur, and Iraq. Faces of Resettlement, a 

video produced in 2013, shows five individuals who entered the United States as 

refugees, from Bhutan, Burma, Burundi, Iraq, and Sudan. Each of them tells their 
18

own story of the ways in which they are rebuilding their lives in their new 

communities. Faces of Resettlement also includes interviews with receiving 

community members.

Transportation

The Department of State funds the international transportation of refugees 

resettled in the United States through a program administered by IOM. The cost 

of transportation is provided to refugees in the form of a loan. Refugees are 

responsible for repaying these loans over time, beginning six months after their 

arrival, although it is possible to request a deferral based on inability to begin 

paying at six months.

Reception and Placement (R&P)

In FY 2014, PRM funded cooperative agreements with nine private 

resettlement agencies to provide initial resettlement services to refugees arriving 

in the United States. The R&P agencies are responsible for providing initial 

reception and core services (including housing, furnishings, clothing and food, as 

well as assistance with access to medical, employment, educational, and social 

services) to arriving refugees. These services are provided according to standards 

of care within a framework of outcomes and indicators developed jointly by the 

NGO community, state refugee coordinators, and U.S. government agencies. The 

nine organizations maintain a nationwide network of some 350 affiliated offices 

in 185 cities to provide services. Two of the organizations also maintain a 

network of 24 affiliated offices through which unaccompanied refugee minors are 

placed into foster care, a program administered and funded by HHS/ORR.

Using R&P funds from PRM supplemented by cash and in-kind 

contributions from private and other sources, the participating agencies provide 

the following services, consistent with the terms of the R&P cooperative 

agreement:

 Sponsorship;

 Pre-arrival resettlement planning, including placement;

 Reception on arrival;

 Basic needs support (including housing, furnishings, food, and clothing) 

for at least 30 days;

 Cultural orientation; 

 Assistance with access to health, employment, education, and other 

services as needed; and

 Development and implementation of an initial resettlement plan for 

each refugee.
19

OFFICE OF REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT (ORR) 

Through the Refugee Act, Congress directed HHS/ORR to provide 

refugees with resettlement assistance that includes employment training, English 

language training, cash assistance (in a manner that promotes early 

independence), and job placement – including providing women with equal 

opportunities to employment as men. . ORR’s mission is to help refugees 

transition into the U.S. by providing benefits and assistance that assist them to 

achieve self-sufficiency and become integrated members of society as soon as 

possible. To this end, ORR funds and administers various programs, some of 

which are highlighted below. 

State-Administered and Wilson-Fish Programs 

Under ORR’s state-administered or Wilson-Fish (WF) programs, refugees 

not eligible for Temporary Assistance for Needy Familes (TANF) or 

Supplemental Security Income (SSI) are eligible to receive up to eight months of 

Refugee Cash Assistance (RCA). Refugees not eligible for Medicaid are eligible 

to receive up to eight months of Refugee Medical Assistance (RMA) upon arrival. 

In state-administered programs that operate a publicly administered RCA 

program (33 States), RCA benefits are based oncash benefit levels established by 

state TANF programs. In States that operate their RCA program through a 

Public-Private Program (PPP) model (5 States) and WF States (12 States plus one 

county), the RCA benefit is based on the higher of the RCA rates outlined in the 

ORR regulations or the State TANF rates. 

The WF program is an alternative to the traditional state-administered 

program, and is usually administered by local voluntary resettlement agencies. 

The WF program emphasizes early employment and economic self-sufficiency by 

integrating cash assistance, case management, and employment services, and by 

incorporating innovative strategies for the provision of cash assistance (e.g. 

financial bonuses for early employment). WF programs also serve as a 

replacement for the State when the State government withdraws from all or part 

of the ORR- funded refugee assistance program. There are currently 13 WF 

programs nationwide. 

ORR also provides states/WF programs with Formula Refugee Social 

Services (RSS) and Targeted Assistance (TAG) funds. ORR distributes these 

funds based on arrival numbers and refugee concentration levels in counties with 

a high utilization of public assistance. Funding is time limited, and refugees can 

only access RSS and TAG services up to five years after arrival. These services 

include: employability services, employment assessment services, on-the-job 
20

training, English language instruction, vocational training, case management, 

translation/interpreter services, social adjustment services, health-related services, 

home management, and if necessary for employment, day care and transportation. 

Additionally, to assist specific groups of refugees, ORR administers the 

following specialized programs through states/WF programs, including CubanHaitian, Older Refugees, Preventive Health, Refugee School Impact, and 

Targeted Assistance. 

ORR Matching Grant Program

The ORR Matching Grant program (MG) is provided through the nine 

national resettlement agencies that provide R & P services and their resettlement 

affiliates in 42 states. The objective of MG is to guide newly-arrived refugee 

households toward economic self-sufficiency through employment within four to 

six months of program eligibility (usually within the first month of arrival). In 

MG, self-sufficiency is defined as total household income from employment that 

enables a family unit to support itself without receipt of public cash 

assistance. ORR awards $2,200 on a per capita basis to each national 

resettlement agency, which then allocates funds to its local service providers 

based on projected enrollments. Agencies provide a 50% match to every federal 

dollar. 

Through the ORR Matching Grant Program, local service providers ensure 

core maintenance services for a minimum of 120 days which include housing, 

transportation, food, and a cash allowance. Clients also receive intensive case 

management and employment services. Refugees who are unable to attain selfsufficiency by day 120 or 180, may access RCA for the remainder of the eight 

month eligibility period. In FY 13, over 29,000 individuals were enrolled in the 

program, 69% of whom achieved self-sufficiency. Approximately 33% of 

refugees participate in the ORR Matching Grant Program.

ORR Refugee Health

ORR recently created a Division of Refugee Health (DRH) to address the 

health and well-being of refugees. DRH is working on various initiatives 

including: collaborating with partners in the implementation of the Affordable 

Care Act (ACA), including the expansion of Medicaid and implementation of the 

state/federal Health Insurance Marketplaces; administering the Survivors of 

Torture program; providing technical assistance on medical screening guidelines, 
21

mental health awareness and linkages, suicide prevention, emergency 

preparedness and other health and mental health initiatives (e.g. vision care, 

autism, etc.). 

ORR Unaccompanied Refugee Minor (URM) Program

ORR provides funds to 15 states who administer over 20 URM programs. 

States contract with local licensed foster care agencies that provide specialized 

placements and services to URMs. URMs live in various placements including: 

traditional and therapeutic foster homes, group homes, semi-independent and 

independent living and residential treatment centers, and homes of relatives. 

URMs receive various services including: English language training, educational 

and vocational training, cultural preservation, social integration, family tracing, 

permanency planning, independent living, and health/mental health care. ORR 

regulations require states to provide services to URM in parity with the state’s 

Title IV-B foster care plan. 

Other ORR Discretionary Refugee Service Programs

ORR also provides funding to non-profit agencies to focus on special 

initiatives or programs for refugees including: case management, ethnic 

community development, home-based child care business development, 

individual development accounts, microenterprise development, and agricultural 

projects. 

ORR Technical Assistance

ORR provides technical assistance (TA) to resettlement stakeholders 

through various organizations that have expertise in certain fields. Currently 

ORR’s TA providers assist stakeholders in the areas of community 

engagement/integration, employment, health, survivors of torture, and TANFstate 

programs. 
22

REGIONAL PROGRAMS

TABLE II

PROPOSED FY 2015 REGIONAL CEILINGS BY PRIORITY

AFRICA

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 14,000

Priority 2 Groups 2,500

Priority 3 Family Reunification Refugees 500

Total Proposed: 17,000

EAST ASIA

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 1,800

Priority 2 Groups 11,000

Priority 3 Family Reunification Refugees 200

Total Proposed: 13,000

EUROPE / CENTRAL ASIA

Priority 1 Individual Referrals

Priority 2 Groups 1,000

Priority 3 Family Reunification Refugees

Total Proposed: 1,000

LATIN AMERICA / CARIBBEAN

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 700

Priority 2 Groups 3,250

Priority 3 Family Reunification Refugees 50

Total Proposed: 4,000

NEAR EAST / SOUTH ASIA

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 18,450

Priority 2 Groups 14,500

Priority 3 Family Reunification Refugees 

 50

Total Proposed: 33,000

UNALLOCATED RESERVE 2,000

TOTAL PROPOSED CEILING: 70,000
23

AFRICA

There are currently some 3.6 million refugees across the African continent, 

constituting roughly 20 percent of the global refugee population. UN-organized 

repatriations were still underway in 2014 for refugees able to return to safe areas 

in northwestern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Côte d’Ivoire. 

Organized repatriations to Angola, Burundi, Liberia, and Rwanda have largely 

been completed, but residual populations remain. UNHCR recommended 

cessation of prima facie refugee status for refugees from Angola and Liberia 

effective June 30, 2012, and for pre-1999 caseload Rwandan refugees effective 

June 30, 2013. Efforts continue to repatriate those who still wish to return and to 

locally integrate residual populations where asylum countries agree to provide 

permanent residence or citizenship.

While there has been significant voluntary repatriation among African 

refugee populations over the past decade, intensified conflict in the Central 

African Republic, South Sudan, and Nigeria since December 2013 has resulted in 

some 500,000 new refugees in 2014 to date. In the Central African Republic, 

violence perpetrated by the predominantly Muslim ex-Séléka forces and the 

predominantly Christian anti-Balaka militia, together with earlier conflict, has 

now displaced over 600,000 Central Africans internally and forced nearly 

350,000 to flee to neighboring Cameroon, Chad, the DRC, and Republic of the 

Congo. In South Sudan, conflict erupted in December 2013 between political 

factions and quickly escalated into a major conflict along ethnic lines. Over 

900,000 South Sudanese have been internally displaced and refugee numbers 

have now reached over 430,000. In Nigeria, terrorist attacks by Boko Haram 

rebels and reprisals by government forces have displaced an estimated 500,000 in 

northern Nigeria. Nearly 60,000 people have been uprooted in Nigeria, including 

more than 15,000 refugees to neighboring Niger and Cameroon. 

Ongoing conflict in the DRC, Sudan, and Somalia has also continued to 

generate new refugee outflows over the past year. Intensified conflict in eastern 

DRC since mid-2012 has led an additional 170,000 Congolese to seek asylum in 

Uganda, Rwanda, and Burundi. Additionally, the persistent threat of attack 

posed by the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) in northeastern DRC as well as 

southeastern CAR continues to cause instability in the region, preventing the 

return of some 40,000 refugees and 400,000 IDPs displaced by the LRA since 

2008. In Sudan, renewed fighting between the Sudanese government and Darfur 

rebels resulted in more than 40,000 new Darfuri refugees fleeing to Chad, 

bringing the total number to more than 350,000. At the same time, the ongoing 

Sudanese conflict with rebel groups in Southern Kordofan and Blue Nile states 

has forced some 253,000 Sudanese refugees to flee to South Sudan, Ethiopia, and 
24

Kenya since June 2011. In Somalia, still the largest refugee generating country 

in Africa with 1 million refugees, small scale conflict and food insecurity 

continues to generate new refugees from some areas while improved conditions in 

other parts of the country has led to some spontaneous refugee returns. Some 

26,000 Somalis fled to neighboring countries in 2013, while over 34,000 refugees 

returned to Somalia in the same year, though most on a temporary basis. The 

steady outflow of Eritreans also continues, not only to refugee camps in Ethiopia 

and eastern Sudan, but also further north as Eritreans attempt to migrate to 

Europe and Israel. More than 300,000 Eritreans have fled political repression, 

forced conscription, and economic collapse over the past decade. 

Africa has also not been immune to conflicts in the neighboring Near East 

region. North Africa has long hosted large numbers of Palestinian refugees. The 

ongoing crisis in Syria has added more than 150,000 new refugees to the region 

including 136,000 in Egypt and 17,000 in Libya. No progress was made over the 

past year in seeking a resolution to the Western Saharan conflict that would 

enable an estimated 90,000 Sahrawi refugees in Algeria to return home.

Most African countries honor the principle of first asylum and most have 

allowed refugees to remain – and in many cases to effectively economically 

and/or socially integrate – until voluntary repatriation is possible. Some 

countries, such as Egypt, have forcibly returned refugees over the past year. For 

countries growing weary of hosting large refugee caseloads, we continue to 

advocate for hospitality and first asylum for refugees. And, for those countries 

that lack formal mechanisms for asylum, we continue to advocate for the 

establishment of systems in consultation with UNHCR. Morocco in particular 

has made progress in this regard.

 

While most African countries adhere to encampment policies for refugees, 

many have allowed for de facto integration by providing land for refugee farmers 

or permitting refugees to open small businesses. Some African countries have 

gone a step further in agreeing to legal local integration of refugees, including the 

granting of legal permanent residence, the right to work, or voting rights. Several 

West African countries, including Côte d’Ivoire, The Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, 

Liberia, Nigeria, and Sierra Leone have initiated programs legalizing the status of 

long-staying former Liberian and Sierra Leonean refugee populations interested 

in remaining in asylum countries. Likewise, Zambia and Namibia have offered 

permanent residence status to more than 10,000 former Angolan refugees. 

Tanzania, in 2008, announced a plan to grant citizenship to Burundi refugees who 

fled their country in 1972. Some 165,000 accepted the offer of “naturalization,” 

but most still lack official documentation of their new citizenship. 
25

Religious Freedom

In Sub-Saharan Africa, people are generally free to practice their chosen 

religions. Governments regularly provide for and respect freedom of religion, 

although in some countries, such as Eritrea and Sudan, religious freedom is 

limited, particularly in the midst of ethnic and other conflicts.

The Government of Eritrea is responsible for severe religious freedom 

abuses in Africa. In recent years the country has engaged in serious religious 

repression by harassing, arresting, and detaining members of independent 

evangelical groups, including Pentecostals and Jehovah’s Witnesses (who lost 

certain rights of citizenship for not participating in the 1993 national referendum). 

Detainees are held in harsh conditions and some have died in custody. The 

government has also sought greater control over the four State-approved religious 

groups: the Eritrean Orthodox Church, the Roman Catholic Church, the 

Evangelical (Lutheran) Church, and the Islamic community. The government 

reportedly holds individuals who are jailed for their religious affiliation at various 

locations. Often detainees are not formally charged, accorded due process, or 

allowed access to their families. While many are ostensibly jailed for evasion of 

military conscription, significant numbers were being held solely for their 

religious beliefs; the current estimate is between 1,200-3,000 individuals detained 

on religious grounds. At least three Jehovah's Witnesses had been detained for 15 

years, reportedly for evading compulsory military service, a term far beyond the 

maximum legal penalty of two years for refusing to perform national service.

In Sudan, the government continues to place restrictions on Christians in a

manner that is inconsistent with its obligation to uphold freedom of religion. 

Although there is no penalty for converting from another religion to Islam, 

converting from Islam is punishable by death, as was demonstrated in the recent 

apostasy case of Ms. Meriam Ishag who was sentenced to death though the 

sentenced was not enforced and she was subsequently released. Authorities 

express their strong prejudice against conversion by occasionally subjecting 

converts to intense scrutiny, ostracism, and intimidation, or by encouraging 

converts to leave the country.

Both Eritrea and Sudan are currently designated as “Countries of Particular 

Concern” (CPC) for particularly severe violations of religious freedom by the 

Department of State under the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998. The 

USRAP continues to be available through Priority 1 referrals to Sudanese, 

Eritrean, and other refugees who are victims of religious intolerance. Refugees 

from Eritrea and Sudan with certain refugee or asylee family members in the 

United States will have access to the USRAP through Priority 3. 
26

In Somalia the provisional federal constitution provides for freedom of 

religion, although it enshrines Islam as the state religion and prohibits proselytism 

for any religion other than Islam. Since its inception in July 2012, the Federal 

Government of Somalia has made incremental progress to establish institutions 

and expanding its authority, but its capacity to enforce the provisional 

constitution remains extremely limited, particularly outside of Mogadishu. There 

have been reports that non-Muslim individuals experience discrimination, 

violence, and detention because of their religious beliefs. Refugees from Somalia 

with certain refugee or asylee family members in the United States also have 

access to the USRAP through Priority 3.

Voluntary Repatriation

Despite new and protracted refugee situations, voluntary repatriation to 

improved conditions in the home country remains the most common and desirable 

durable solution. With the conclusion of various peace agreements and the 

support of the U.S. government and other donors, UNHCR has made great 

progress in promoting and supporting refugee repatriation and reintegration in 

Africa. Over the past 20 years, net refugee numbers in Africa have fallen by 

nearly half (from more than six million at their height in the 1990s to 3.6 million 

today) even in the face of new outflows.

In West Africa, out of an estimated 300,000 who fled the 2010-2011 

election-related violence in Côte d’Ivoire, over 230,000 have now returned home. 

UNHCR anticipates assisting with the return of an additional 20,000 Ivoirian 

refugees in 2014. The final round of UNHCR’s Liberian repatriation program 

was completed at the end of December 2012, with more than 155,000 Liberians 

benefiting from assisted returns since 2004; in all, more than 700,000 Liberians 

have returned home either spontaneously or with UNHCR assistance. In Mali, 

while UNHCR is not yet promoting refugee return to northern Mali, refugees are 

beginning to return spontaneously to safe regions now under government control. 

Neighboring states still host some 190,000 Malian refugees, but an estimated 

22,500 had returned home by April 2014.

In East Africa, the repatriation to South Sudan that started in 2005 was 

largely concluded in 2011 with the return of more than 370,000 refugees. 

However, due to growing instability in South Sudan in 2012 and 2013 and the 

current widespread conflict, all repatriation has stopped and the focus has instead 

shifted to emergency response to the 300,000 new refugees. No UNHCRorganized repatriation initiatives are currently anticipated for the Darfur region of 

Sudan or Somalia, where insecurity continues to prevent safe and dignified return. 

UNHCR, the Government of Kenya, and the Government of Somalia signed a 
27

Somali refugee repatriation framework in 2013 and are engaged in coordination 

and regional plans for refugee returns when conditions are appropriate in 

Somalia, but UNHCR does not deem it safe to encourage return to Somalia at this 

point. Despite the efforts of some asylum countries, including Israel, to repatriate 

Eritrean refugees, UNHCR has strongly discouraged returns to Eritrea given 

ongoing political repression and harsh treatment of returnees.

In Central Africa, most organized repatriation to Burundi ended in 2010 

and there have been over 500,000 returns since 2002, including over 53,000 of 

the 1972-caseload refugees who chose not to accept the Government of 

Tanzania’s offer of naturalization. Repatriation of the last of the 1993-era 

Burundi refugees in Tanzania was completed with the closure of Mtabila Camp in 

December 2012. Although the majority of Rwandan refugees returned home in 

the late 1990’s, some 50,000-100,000 remain in exile. With the cessation of 

prima facie refugee status for pre-1999 Rwandan refugees on June 30, 2013, 

remaining Rwandans may be required either to repatriate or to seek other means 

of remaining in asylum countries. Repatriation to relatively stable areas of 

eastern DRC wound down in 2011 with the conclusion of returns from Zambia 

and Tanzania to Katanga Province, but renewed hostilities between the GDRC 

and the M23 rebel group—and increased activity of other armed groups across 

eastern DRC-- erased most of these gains and North and South Kivu provinces 

and Katanga remain mostly too insecure for large-scale refugee return. Ethnic 

violence that erupted in late 2009 in Equateur Province forced some 140,000 

Congolese to flee to the Central African Republic and the Republic of Congo. A 

facilitated repatriation for these Congolese refugees began in May 2012; as of 

April 2014, more than 112,000 refugees have been repatriated back to 

northwestern DRC and UNHCR hopes to repatriate an additional 20,000 refugees 

by June 30, 2014. 

Local Integration

In a number of protracted situations, refugees have been able to become 

self-sufficient, and their camps and settlements have been efficiently integrated 

both economically and socially into the host communities, even as legal rights lag 

behind. This integration dynamic has occurred particularly for refugees who fled 

during the 1960s through the early 1980s to countries that had arable land 

available, allowing many refugees to move out of camps. Despite such de facto 

integration, refugees residing among the local population did not necessarily 

enjoy the rights, entitlements, or economic opportunities available to legal 

residents. As a result, this piecemeal integration was often an interim, rather than 

a durable, solution for many African refugees.
28

More recently, however, a number of African countries have offered more 

formal integration as a durable solution for residual refugee populations who will 

not or cannot repatriate. In conjunction with UNHCR, the Governments of Côte 

d’Ivoire, The Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Liberia, Nigeria, and Sierra Leone 

launched a regional local integration program for Liberian and Sierra Leonean 

refugees in 2007. That program provided refugees opportunities for economic 

self-reliance; activities to enhance the quality of their social integration; and legal 

rights and documentation, including access to citizenship in some countries and 

freedom of movement in all countries under the protocols of the Economic 

Community of West African States (ECOWAS). The Government of Zambia 

pledged in 2012 to provide permanent residence status to 10,000 former Angolan 

refugees -- mainly refugees who arrived before 1986, were born in Zambia, or are 

married to Zambians -- and has already approved 6,000 who meet eligibility 

criteria. Namibia as well has agreed to legal local integration of 2,400 former 

Angolan refugees.

Senegal offered Mauritanian refugees who wished to remain in Senegal the 

option of becoming Senegalese citizens in 2007, and UNHCR, in partnership with 

the Senegalese government, launched a campaign in 2012 to provide digitized 

and biometric identity cards to some 19,000 refugees (of whom 14,000 were 

Mauritanians) by the end of the year. The card guarantees holders the same rights 

as Senegalese citizens, including the right to residence in the country and to travel 

to ECOWAS member states. The Governments of Uganda and Mozambique 

have previously stated their intention to provide refugees with local integration 

opportunities and citizenship, but have not yet passed the required legislation. As 

mentioned above, the Government of Tanzania offered to provide permanent 

settlement and citizenship to nearly 200,000 1972-era Burundi refugees; some 

165,000 accepted the offer and were collectively naturalized, although the vast 

majority have not yet received documentation and the modalities of the 

integration process are still being negotiated. 

While not formal integration programs, a few countries (Uganda and Niger, 

for example) have permitted refugees to live or work outside of camps or have 

temporarily adapted to natural rural to urban migration that involves refugees as 

well as nationals (for example, Kenya until late 2012). Ethiopia formally 

introduced an out-of-camp policy for Eritrean refugees in August 2010, allowing 

Eritreans to live outside camps if they are able to support themselves or if they 

have someone to sponsor them financially. While it does not give Eritrean 

refugees the right to work, it does offer additional educational opportunities, 

including tertiary education. In 2013, Sudan also agreed to issue work permits to 

some 30,000 Eritrean refugees who wish to work outside of refugee camps in 

eastern Sudan.
29

Third-Country Resettlement

Given the political and economic volatility in many parts of Africa, 

resettlement to third countries outside the region is an essential durable solution 

and element of protection for certain refugees. With limited opportunities for 

permanent integration in many countries of asylum and the protracted nature of 

some refugee situations, the need for third-country resettlement of African 

refugees is expected to continue. In recent years, UNHCR has increasingly 

viewed resettlement as an important tool of protection for refugees in Africa and 

has shown an increase in resettlement referrals this past year. 

FY 2014 U.S. Admissions

We project close to 16,000 African refugee arrivals in FY 2014. This 

number is a result of the increase in processing capacity in a number of countries 

of asylum.

We expect to admit nearly 12,000 refugees from various processing 

locations in East and Central Africa. Two countries of origin – Somalia and DRC 

– account for the vast majority of U.S. refugee admissions from the region, 

followed by Eritrea, Sudan and Ethiopia. Approximately 4,000 refugees will 

depart for the United States from Kenya this year, mostly Somalis in Kakuma. 

Although we have resumed processing in Dadaab intermittently, originally 

suspended in October 2011, capacity is limited by the security situation and 

interview slots are generally reserved for the most urgent cases. To reach the 

remaining refugees pending USCIS adjudication, PRM funded the construction of 

a transit center in Kakuma camp that can accommodate approximately 2,000 

refugees from Dadaab and is currently at capacity. Admissions from Ethiopia 

continue to be strong with approximately 3,500 U.S. arrivals projected this fiscal 

year. Populations include Somalis from camps in the east and Eritreans from the 

northern camps, including approximately 50 Eritrean unaccompanied refugee 

minors. Implementation of the enhanced Congolese Resettlement Strategy –

UNHCR’s effort to refer 50,000 DRC refugees for resettlement from Rwanda, 

Uganda, Tanzania and Burundi to all resettlement countries over the next 5-7 

years – continued with increased processing in Rwanda and Uganda. We 

anticipate strong arrivals from Rwanda and Uganda in FY14, at 2,000 and 1,700 

arrivals respectively. 

From Southern Africa, we expect to admit 1,300 refugees consisting 

primarily of Somalis from South Africa and Congolese from Namibia, Zambia, 
30

and Zimbabwe. Elsewhere in Africa, we continue to interview refugees from the 

Central African Republic in southern Chad, Sudanese Darfuri refugees in Eastern 

Chad and expect to admit nearly 400 refugees altogether from Chad in FY 2014. 

We restarted resettlement from eastern Chad following a three-year suspension 

after obtaining the support of the Government of Chad. 

Outside of sub-Saharan Africa, we anticipate approximately 2,500 

Sudanese, Somali, Ethiopian, Eritrean and other sub-Saharan African refugees 

who will be arriving primarily from Tunisia, Egypt, Turkey, and Russia or via 

one of the UNHCR Emergency Transit Centers in Romania and Slovakia. In all, 

we expect to admit refugees of nearly 30 African nationalities, processed in 

dozens of countries during FY 2014.

FY 2015 U.S. Resettlement Program

We propose up to 17,000 resettlement numbers for African refugees in FY 

2015. PRM has actively engaged relevant offices within the Department of State, 

UNHCR, the NGO community, and DHS/USCIS to identify caseloads 

appropriate for resettlement consideration. As a result of these discussions, PRM 

has identified a number of nationalities and groups for priority processing during 

FY 2015.

From East Africa, we expect 13,000 admissions. Kenya will continue to be 

the largest resettlement country departing primarily Somalis. Ethiopia will be the 

second largest resettlement country with the continued processing of Somalis and 

Eritreans. We also expect UNHCR to continuing referring Eritrean 

unaccompanied refugee minors at a rate of about 100 per year from camps in 

northern Ethiopia. We anticipate that the first successful P-3 family reunification 

program applicants will arrive in the United States in FY 2015. In the Great Lakes 

region, processing of Congolese in Rwanda, Uganda, Tanzania, and Burundi will 

continue, and P-2 processing will continue in Rwanda.

From southern Africa, we expect to admit 1,500 refugees consisting 

primarily of Somalis from South Africa and Congolese from Mozambique, 

Malawi, Namibia, Zambia, and Zimbabwe. In Chad, UNHCR intends to rapidly 

increase the number of referrals in FY 2014 and 2015 to create a robust 

resettlement program for Sudanese Darfuris in eastern Chad. This will be in 

addition to the continued processing of Central African Republic refugees from 

southern Chad.
31

Outside of sub-Saharan Africa, we anticipate up to 2,000 Sudanese, 

Somali, Ethiopian, Eritrean and other sub-Saharan African refugees will be 

admitted from Egypt, Lebanon, Turkey, Jordan, and Russia. Processing in these 

locations largely depends on the local security situation which will determine if 

teams of DHS/USCIS refugee officers can access these locations. 

Proposed FY 2015 Africa program to include arrivals from the following 

categories: 

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 14,000

Priority 2 Groups 2,500

Priority 3 Family Reunification 500

Total Proposed Ceiling 17,000

EAST ASIA 

Several East Asian countries host large and diverse refugee populations. 

Recent years have seen important developments for these groups. Thailand, 

Malaysia, Bangladesh, and India continue to host large numbers of Burmese 

refugees and asylum-seekers. The U.S. government continues to press for 

meaningful political and democratic reform and national reconciliation with 

ethnic minority groups in Burma, while recognizing reforms made over the past 

three years by easing sanctions. The international community continues to 

engage in discussions regarding the voluntary return of Burmese refugees, but 

acknowledges that ongoing conflict, the pending nationwide ceasefire agreement 

with armed ethnic groups, peace and national reconciliation efforts, and limited 

access to provide humanitarian and development assistance make large-scale 

return of refugees in safety and with dignity a gradual process. 

The resettlement of more than 100,000 Burmese refugees from Thailand 

since 2006 – including more than 75,000 to the United States – has significantly 

reduced the number of Burmese refugees in the camps who are eligible for the 

U.S. P-2 resettlement program due to the registration date requirement. After 

more than seven years of large-scale resettlement, we have arrived at the natural 

conclusion of the group resettlement program that has specific eligibility criteria 

for Burmese refugees who were re-registered by UNHCR in 2005 and formally 

registered by the Royal Thai Government (RTG). Throughout 2013 we 

conducted rolling announcement deadlines for eligible Burmese refugees to apply 

for U.S. resettlement that varied by camp based on when resettlement operations 
32

began. More than 5,000 eligible Burmese refugees submitted expressions of 

interest during the announcement period. P-2 processing will continue - with a 

steady decline in annual departures - until we have completed the processing of 

every application received by the deadline in each camp. Those who do not 

exercise this option will be able to remain in the camps until safe and voluntary 

returns are possible. The United States will continue to accept individual referrals 

from UNHCR for all nationalities, including Burmese. 

Since 2006, UNHCR Malaysia has operated the second largest refugee 

status determination program in the world and it is currently the largest single 

country in the U.S. resettlement program with some 9,000 projected refugee 

departures in FY14 and more than 51,000 since 2006. As of the end of March 

2014, there were 143,435 persons of concern registered with UNHCR in Malaysia 

of which 133,070, or 92.8 percent, are from Burma. In addition, some 10,365 

asylum-seekers and refugees from various countries – primarily Afghanistan, 

Iraq, Somalia, and Sri Lanka – are registered with UNHCR in 

Malaysia. Malaysia is not a party to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of 

Refugees or its 1967 Protocol, but generally tolerates the presence of refugees.

The systematic and continuous persecution of the Rohingya, an ethnic, 

linguistic, and religious minority from Rakhine State, Burma who are de jure 

stateless by Burmese law, have resulted in large numbers seeking safety in 

Bangladesh and in other neighboring countries for over five decades. The most 

recent large influx of approximately 250,000 Rohingya from Rakhine State to the 

Cox’s Bazar district in southeastern Bangladesh began in July 1991. Since then, 

small but steady flows of Rohingya continue to arrive, with a spike after hundreds 

of thousands fled to Bangladesh and neighboring countries following the June and 

October 2012 violence in Rakhine State. Between 1992 and 2005, over 236,000 

UNHCR-registered Rohingya refugees were voluntarily repatriated from Cox’s 

Bazar to Rakhine State, most of them immediately after their arrival. No 

repatriation operation has taken place since. UNHCR currently supports some 

30,000 refugees who remain in two official refugee camps (Kutupalong and 

Nayapara) in Cox’s Bazar. An additional 9,000 unregistered Rohingya reside in 

an unofficial settlement in Leda and approximately 26,000 unregistered Rohingya 

reside in the makeshift Kutupalong site, adjacent to the official Kutupalong 

refugee camp. In addition, the Government of Bangladesh (GOB) estimated that 

200,000 – 500,000 undocumented Rohingya are currently residing in various 

villages and towns outside the refugee camps, while UNHCR estimates 

approximately 200,000 living in Cox’s Bazar, Bandarban, and Chittagong 

districts. UNHCR continues to work to improve the protection environment, 

promote greater self-reliance, ensure access to essential services, and continue 

advocacy for durable solutions for both registered refugees and undocumented 

Rohingya populations. 
33

The cases of more than 500 individual Rohingya in Bangladesh, including 

281 individuals approved for resettlement to several countries, have been on hold 

since October 2010 when the GOB halted third-country resettlement activities 

pending a review of their refugee policy. In February 2014, the GOB announced 

its national strategy on “Myanmar Refugees and Undocumented Myanmar 

Nationals in Bangladesh.” The U.S. government is encouraged by GOB 

commitments made in the national strategy, particularly to survey and list the 

undocumented Rohingya and to allow third country resettlement to continue. We 

are prepared to resume resettlement activity immediately upon notification by the 

GOB that we may proceed. In addition, we expect ongoing UNHCR referrals of 

urban Burmese in India. 

As reflected in the North Korean Human Rights Act, the United States 

remains deeply concerned about the human rights situation of North Koreans both 

inside the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) and in various 

countries in the region. The United States began resettling interested, eligible 

North Korean refugees and their family members in 2006 and remains committed 

to continuing this program.

Religious Freedom

Although many governments in East Asia do not restrict religious freedom, 

religious believers face serious persecution in several countries. The DPRK, 

China, and Burma are designated by the Department of State as Countries of 

Particular Concern (CPCs) under the International Religious Freedom Act of 

1998 for systematic, ongoing, and egregious violations of religious freedom. 

The DPRK severely restricts religious freedom, including organized 

religious activity, except that which is supervised tightly by officially recognized 

groups linked to the government. Although the DPRK constitution provides for 

“freedom of religious belief,” genuine religious freedom does not exist. 

Information about the day-to-day life of religious persons in the country is 

limited. Religious and human rights groups outside of the country have provided 

numerous reports that members of underground churches have been beaten, 

arrested, tortured, or killed because of their religious beliefs.

While the constitutions of China, Burma, and Vietnam provide for freedom 

of religion, in practice, these governments restrict or repress religious activities of 

some members of religious communities in a manner that is inconsistent with 

their commitments to uphold freedom of religion. 
34

The Chinese government continues to harass and interfere with 

unregistered religious groups, most notably the unofficial Catholic churches loyal 

to the Holy See, Protestant “house churches,” some Muslim groups (especially 

ethnic Uighur Muslims in the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region), members of 

the Falun Gong, and Tibetan Buddhists reverent to the Dalai Lama. China

additionally reprimanded members of government-sanctioned churches for 

advocacy on behalf of their church communities. Certain religious or spiritual 

groups are banned by law. The criminal law defines banned groups as “evil 

cults” and those belonging to them can be sentenced to prison. This includes 

Falun Gong and some other qigong-based groups, in addition to some Christian 

groups. Although legislation officially abolished the Reeducation Through Labor 

(RTL) system in December 2013, religious believers have been harassed, 

arrested, detained in “black jails” without due process and sentenced to long jail 

terms. There have been credible allegations of torture.

In Burma, the government implemented considerable political and 

economic reforms, resulting in improved respect for many human rights. While 

some deficiencies in respect for and protection of the right to religious freedom 

continued, the government continued to support interfaith dialogue and provided 

some members of the international community and international organizations 

greater access to ethnic minority areas. However, the government continues to 

discriminate against religious minorities. Antidiscrimination laws do not apply to 

ethnic groups not formally recognized under the law as citizens, including the 

Muslim Rohingya in northern Rakhine State, and some other ethnic groups. 

Incidents of violence against Rohingya increased beginning in 2012 and have 

carried over into 2014. Further, societal abuses and discrimination based on a mix 

of ethnicity and religious affiliation, belief or practice occurred. 

Vietnam and the United States signed an agreement on religious freedom in 

May 2005, under which Vietnam committed to improving the status of religious 

freedom in Vietnam. As a result of the progress Vietnam made after signing the 

agreement, the U.S. Government removed Vietnam from the CPC list in 

November 2006. Over the past three years, Vietnam’s religious freedom record 

has been mixed. Progress has been made with regard to the 

registration/recognition of religious groups and congregations. In addition, 

religious groups have experienced expanded freedom of assembly. However, 

there are also reports of harassment at the local level, including through the use of 

land laws. Several Protestant congregations in rural areas continue to report 

harassment, including beatings and forced renunciations. 
35

Nationals of the DPRK, Vietnam, China, Laos, and Burma have access to 

the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program. North Korean and Burmese refugees also 

have access to family reunification processing through Priority 3.

Voluntary Repatriation

Although the Burmese government has taken steps to implement 

significant democratic and political reforms, ongoing fighting continues in 

Kachin and northern Shan States, and tensions remain high in Rakhine State since 

the June and October 2012 violence. Since 2011, Burmese President Thein 

Sein’s reform-minded administration has been working towards a national peace 

process. We are hopeful that substantial progress towards this goal will be made 

in the near future. Further, the post-ceasefire peace process will require 

resolution of unresolved political grievances. Therefore, the voluntary 

repatriation of most Burmese refugees and asylum seekers in Thailand, 

Bangladesh, Malaysia, India and elsewhere is not a viable solution in the 

immediate future. 

Local Integration 

Due to fears of a “pull factor,” countries in the region have traditionally 

been reluctant to integrate refugees or to grant asylum. We hope that U.S. efforts 

to resettle large numbers of refugees from the camps along the Thailand-Burma 

border will encourage the RTG to allow greater opportunities for livelihood, 

vocational training and other skills-building activities for those refugees who will 

not be resettled. The United States and other donor governments continue to 

engage regularly with the RTG concerning the future of the nine camps on the 

Thailand-Burma border. Local integration remains a difficult option, due to 

opposition from host countries, such as Thailand, Bangladesh, Malaysia, and 

India. UNHCR and the international community continue to advocate for these 

governments to make policy changes relating to refugees, and to expand 

humanitarian protection and assistance space for refugees, asylum seekers and 

other persons of concern.

Third-Country Resettlement 

The United States continues to lead third country resettlement efforts in the 

region. Other countries, including Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the 

Nordic countries, resettle refugees referred by UNHCR. In FY 2014, the United 

States processed UNHCR-referred refugee cases in China, the Hong Kong 

Special Administrative Region, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand. 
36

In March 2014, UNHCR informed us that it had identified more than two 

thousand registered Burmese Chin refugees in Malaysia with duplicate 

biographical data who may have gained access to the U.S. Refugee Admissions 

Program using fraudulent identities. The cases of these refugees who had not 

departed Malaysia were immediately placed on hold pending the results of 

UNHCR’s investigation. UNHCR’s preliminary findings suggest that the vast 

majority of Burmese Chin refugees who committed identity fraud did so in order 

to register with UNHCR and obtain a registration document as protection from 

arrest and deportation, and not to obtain resettlement. The Department of 

Homeland Security is reviewing the cases of Burmese Chin refugees who have 

arrived in the United States whose duplicate identities have been flagged. 

Routine processing and departure of refugee cases not involved in the fraud 

investigation continues. 

FY 2014 U.S. Admissions 

We expect to admit up to 15,000 refugees from East Asia in FY 2014. This 

will include close to 5,000 Burmese ethnic minorities (mostly Karen, Karenni, 

and Kachin) living in camps along the Thai-Burma border, some 9,000 Burmese 

(of various ethnic minorities) in Malaysia, and a small number of urban refugees 

of various nationalities in the region. 

FY 2015 U.S. Resettlement Program 

We expect to admit up to 13,000 refugees from East Asia in FY 2015. This 

will include up to 3,800 Burmese ethnic minorities (mostly Karen and Karenni) 

living in camps along the Thai-Burma border, some 7,500 Burmese (of various 

ethnic minorities) in Malaysia, and a small number of urban refugees of various 

nationalities in the region. 

Proposed FY 2015 East Asia program to include arrivals from the following 

categories: 

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 1,800

Priority 2 Groups 11,000 

Priority 3 Family Reunification 200

Total Proposed Ceiling 13,000
37

EUROPE AND CENTRAL ASIA

Europe continues to host large refugee populations, as well as other persons 

affected by conflict, who, over the last two decades, have been left in situations of 

protracted displacement – often in dire conditions. In its 2012-2013 Global 

Appeal, UNHCR reported that there were nearly 4.4 million asylum seekers, 

refugees, internally displaced persons, stateless individuals, or other persons “of 

concern” throughout Europe and Central Asia. Many had fled conflicts outside 

the region, such as in Afghanistan and Syria, but the estimates also include 

persons claiming persecution within Eurasia, including hundreds of thousands of 

refugees and IDPs in the Balkans and Caucasus.

With the 2012 accession of Bulgaria, Portugal and the Republic of 

Moldova to the 1954 and 1961 Statelessness Conventions, and Hungary’s 

decision to lift its reservations to the 1954 Convention, 36 of the 49 States in 

Europe are now party to the 1954 Convention. Twenty-four are party to the 1961 

Convention. The Russian Federation and all countries of Central Asia except 

Uzbekistan have acceded to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of 

Refugees and its 1967 Protocol. However, compliance with these instruments 

remains problematic. Despite sustained efforts by UNHCR and other 

stakeholders to build protection capacity and help strengthen asylum systems and 

protection laws in the region, results have thus far been modest. Many of these 

countries have been slow or reluctant to recognize and integrate refugees and 

other at-risk individuals. The protection provided by some governments in the 

region to refugees, asylum seekers, and other migrants is limited and public 

intolerance, including attacks against non-Slavic foreigners, is common. There 

are documented cases of refoulement. UNHCR has been working with many of 

these governments to establish and/or reform asylum procedures and refugee 

protection laws. 

The 1990’s break-up of the Soviet Union also created newly independent 

states with sizeable populations of stateless individuals due to gaps in nationality 

laws and inconsistent implementation of those laws. Difficulty in establishing 

citizenship at the time of succession has also created later problems for children 

born to an undocumented parent(s). The problem of statelessness remains in the 

region, although some states, such as Turkmenistan, have taken steps to register 

stateless individuals and facilitate their acquisition of nationality. 

According to UNHCR, as of June 2013, there were approximately 408,000 

refugees and IDPs in the Balkans, almost all of whom have been displaced for a 

decade or longer. An estimated 210,000 persons of this population are displaced 

from Kosovo, most of whom currently live in Serbia. UNHCR estimates that 

97,000 individuals in this group are in need of assistance. Since 2000, the 
38

overall level of return to Kosovo from Serbia has been low. There have been 

over 25,000 voluntary returns of minorities to Kosovo since the conflict ended. 

Housing, documentation issues, a lack of employment opportunity, and 

occasional violence directed against ethnic Serbs in Kosovo has limited return 

prospects. 

Since 2010, the countries of the region – with the assistance of the 

international community – made significant progress toward resolving a large part 

of the refugee situation in the Balkans. A November 2011 ministerial meeting in 

Belgrade brought together Ministers of Foreign Affairs from Serbia, Croatia, 

Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Montenegro to sign a Joint Declaration expressing 

their collective will to resolve the protracted refugee and displacement situation, 

and they committed their countries to a Regional Housing Program (RHP) for 

refugees and IDPs supported by international donors. The RHP was designed to 

create durable solutions for up to 74,000 of the most vulnerable refugees and 

IDPs in those countries. While principally affecting housing, the RHP has 

established the Regional Coordination Forum to discuss other pertinent issues 

such as pensions, civil documentation, exchange of data and other public 

information. An international donors’ conference in April 2012 succeeded in 

raising over $340 million (€260 million) to support the RHP over five years. The 

United States provided $10 million in FY 2012, and U.S. involvement is seen as a 

critical ingredient to the RHP’s success. While 12 projects prepared by the four 

partner countries were approved by the RHP Assembly of Donors in 2013, the 

implementation start is expected in the summer of 2014. 

Despite important steps taken by governments to assist individuals 

displaced by the collapse of the Soviet Union and related conflicts, many 

internally displaced persons (IDPs) and returnees still await housing 

compensation, restitution, or alternative accommodation provision in the North 

and South Caucasus. The Nagorno-Karabakh War displaced over 800,000 

Azerbaijanis in several waves between 1988 and 1994. Today 600,000 IDPs 

remain, almost 7 percent of Azerbaijan’s population. The vast majority live in 

temporary shelters, administrative buildings, dormitories and hostels, and the 

government has done little to support integration or aid its displaced population. 

Armenia received 350,000 refugees from Azerbaijan, of whom almost 3,000 

remain as refugees. A large number emigrated to other countries, and nearly 

90,000 were ultimately naturalized. Many refugees and former refugees continue 

to live in unsuitable collective housing or remote villages with insufficient access 

to government services. A struggling economy and the recent influx of 11,000 

Syrian-Armenians has left the government few resources to address refugee 

concerns, and the country remains dependent on international humanitarian and 

development assistance. Finally, Georgia has been affected by large population 
39

movements since the 1990s as consequences of the breakup of the Soviet Union 

and the occupation of two regions, Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Although an 

estimated 147,000 people have returned to their homes in the Gali district (in the 

Abkhazia region), secured a durable housing solution elsewhere in Georgia, or 

remained in their original places of residence near the South Ossetia region, 

approximately 240,000 remain displaced from the 1993 and 2008 wars. 

Religious Freedom

The status of religious freedom varies widely across Europe and Central 

Asia. Some countries place legal restrictions or prohibitions on the wearing of 

religious attire in schools or in public, particularly impacting Muslims, Jews, 

Christians, and Sikhs.

Several countries in the region mandate the registration of religious groups. 

Nontraditional religious groups are sometimes labeled as “sects” or “cults” by 

their home governments and may be subject to special scrutiny and limited 

privileges. Registration typically carries the right to rent or own property, hold 

religious services, appoint military and prison chaplains, and receive state 

subsidies. Restitution of religious properties is an issue yet to be fully resolved. 

Uzbekistan is designated by the Department of State as a CPC under the 

International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 for systematic, ongoing, and 

egregious violations of religious freedom. 

There is a disturbing increase in anti-Semitism and anti-Muslim sentiment 

in a number of countries in the region, manifested as physical assaults and verbal 

harassment; hate speech over the internet; and vandalism of cemeteries, 

synagogues, mosques, and monuments. In several countries, openly anti-Semitic, 

nationalistic political parties have gained seats in parliaments, with government 

officials and elected members of parliaments at times responsible for anti-Semitic 

statements and acts. 

Bans on Kosher/Halal slaughter exist in several European countries, while 

there are increasing calls for bans or restrictions on circumcision, particularly in 

the Nordic countries. Both circumcision and Kosher/Halal slaughter are religious 

practices for Jews and Muslims, as well as some other religious groups. 

The Russian government uses its anti-extremism law to justify raids, 

arrests, and bans on religious literature of peaceful, “non-traditional” minority 

religious groups, including readers of Muslim theologian Said Nursi, Jehovah’s 

Witnesses, Scientologists, Falun Gong practitioners, and some Protestant groups. 
40

In Turkey, some religious minority communities, including Alevis, face 

difficulties owning property, registering places of worship, training clergy, and 

obtaining visas for religious workers. Conscientious objectors through their faith 

are sometimes arrested and prosecuted for failing to comply with laws mandating 

military service, as previously witnessed in Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, 

Turkey, and Turkmenistan. 

Voluntary Repatriation

The international community continues to support efforts to create 

favorable conditions for the return of ethnic minorities to their homes in the 

Balkans. In June 2006, Serbian, Kosovo, and UN authorities signed the Protocol 

on Voluntary and Sustainable Return to Kosovo, which sought to improve the 

conditions for return by focusing on three elements: ensuring the safety of 

returnees, returning property to the displaced and rebuilding their houses, and 

creating an overall environment that sustains returns. There is still much work to 

be done in ensuring that those hoping to return have all the means to do so. PRM 

supported the return process through a grant to Danish Refugee Council in FY 

2013 that promoted sustainable return through shelter repair, income-generation 

activities including vocational training and the provision of agricultural inputs, as 

well as community development projects to facilitate inter-ethnic dialogue. 

International funding continues to facilitate and sustain the return and 

reintegration of displaced minorities from Kosovo. The Regional Housing 

program will allow thousands of returns to take place in Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia 

and Herzegovina, and Montenegro. The program will encourage both voluntary 

repatriation and local integration as durable solutions. 

Local Integration

UNHCR has led efforts to create viable asylum systems and effective legal 

protections for refugees in the Balkans, the Russian Federation, the South 

Caucasus and Central Asia. However, ineffective implementation of these laws, 

combined with the history of national animosities and xenophobia throughout the 

region, often makes effective local integration difficult for ethnic minority 

refugees. In Azerbaijan, a majority of refugees lack legal status, despite being 

recognized by UNHCR and permitted by the government to stay in the country. 

As such, refugees do not have access to legal employment, making local 

integration in Azerbaijan extremely difficult. In Russia, difficulties in acquiring 

citizenship remain for some former Soviet citizens who resided in Russia before 

1992 and are, under Russian law, entitled to Russian citizenship. Groups such as 

the Meskhetian Turks have been unable to obtain Russian citizenship and thus 

remain de facto stateless. In Russia, UNHCR focuses on quality-assurance 
41

measures to strengthen the national asylum system, including access to the 

asylum system at borders, and to contribute to the Government’s plans to bring its 

reception infrastructure and processes up to full international standards. In 

Montenegro, the path to citizenship has been particularly slow for those displaced 

from Kosovo. The Regional Housing Program should provide an easier path to 

local integration for some of the most vulnerable, including Roma populations, 

among this group. The Government of Serbia is implementing local integration 

programs for refugees from Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia and the 

displaced persons from Kosovo.

Third-Country Resettlement 

The United States continues to accept refugees from the region, almost 

exclusively religious minorities from Russia and Eurasia processed under the 

Lautenberg Amendment. Jewish immigration to Israel from the region continues 

under the United Israel Appeal Program. 

FY 2014 U.S. Admissions

In FY 2014 we estimate fewer than 1,000 admissions from Europe and 

Central Asia. Religious minorities processed under the Lautenberg Amendment 

from countries of the former Soviet Union constitute nearly the entire caseload. 

During FY 2014, applicants were processed in Baku, Bishkek, Chisinau, Kyiv, 

Valletta, Minsk, Odessa, Tbilisi, Moscow, Timisoara, and Humenne.

FY 2015 U.S. Resettlement Program

The proposed FY 2015 ceiling for refugees from Europe and Central Asia 

is 1,000 individuals. Priority 2 includes individuals who will be processed under 

Lautenberg guidelines in the states of the former Soviet Union. Low approval 

rates for this Priority 2 program and a reduced rate of new applications serve to 

limit the number of admissions.

Proposed FY 2015 Europe and Central Asia program to include arrivals from 

the following categories: 

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 0

Priority 2 Groups 1,000 

Priority 3 Family Reunification 0

Total Proposed Ceiling 1,000
42

LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN 

In 2014, the number of refugees, asylum seekers, IDPs, and other people of 

concern in Latin America and the Caribbean approached six million. The 

ongoing conflict in Colombia generated the largest numbers of refugees and IDPs 

in the region, and the second largest world-wide. The Government of Colombia 

(GOC) reports 5.4 million IDPs as of February 2014. Despite an expanded state 

presence and improved security in cities and towns throughout Colombia, 

displacement continues. In 2013 the GOC registered 115,000 newly displaced 

individuals as a result of confrontations between the GOC and illegal armed 

groups, including the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), the 

National Liberation Army (ELN), criminal gangs (BACRIM) and criminal narcotrafficking networks. According to UNHCR, it is likely that displacement will 

continue to grow. 

In surrounding countries, including Ecuador, Venezuela, Costa Rica, and 

Panama, there are over 400,000 Colombian asylum seekers and refugees and the 

number continues to rise. Ecuador has the highest number of recognized 

Colombian refugees and asylum seekers in Latin America. The Government of 

Ecuador (GOE) has recognized around 56,640 and UNHCR reports an additional 

115,325 persons of concern. The asylum process in Ecuador is slow and difficult 

to access; the refugee approval rate is around six percent. In May 2012, the GOE 

issued Presidential Decree 1182, which limited the amount of time that asylum 

seekers have to file a claim to 15 days. This is in addition to the pre-admissibility 

step to the refugee status determination (RSD) process, which has created 

additional delays. Asylum seekers pending RSD can wait up to a year for a 

decision. UNHCR has highlighted a deteriorating protection environment in 

Ecuador for refugees, citing delays in registration, revocations of refugee status, 

labor exploitation, a more active presence of illegal armed groups and criminal 

gangs, forced recruitment of minors, and increasing xenophobia and 

discrimination. Other countries in the region, such as Costa Rica, Venezuela, the 

Dominican Republic, and Panama, also have established asylum procedures, but 

the registration and determination procedures are often implemented 

ineffectively. UNHCR is working with these countries, including Ecuador, to 

improve their asylum processes.

In Panama, many of the 1,725 recognized refugees and 15,000 persons of 

concern are Colombians. After more than a decade of ineffective handling of the 

temporary humanitarian protection status holders (PTH) situation, Panama’s 

Office for Assistance to Refugees (ONPAR) delivered permanent resident 

documentation to 200 PTH holders in March and 213 will receive it later this 

year. In Costa Rica, there are 12,737 recognized refugees and 8,290 of persons of 

concern to UNHCR. Under a new migration law, Costa Rica re-established its 
43

Refugee Department in March 2010, along with a Migration Tribunal that opened 

in 2011. The recognition rate for asylum applications is approximately 7.5%. 

Decisions in asylum cases in Costa Rica can take up to a year yet asylum seekers 

have the right to work while they are waiting for a decision. There are 4,340 

recognized refugees in Venezuela, and UNHCR estimates there are more than 

200,000 persons live in a refugee-like situation in the country. In Brazil, there are 

over 4,000 recognized refugees from 75 countries; the largest numbers are from 

Angola and Colombia.

Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala have in recent years been 

increasingly impacted by the actions of illegal armed groups, including organized 

crime, leading to high rates of drug and human trafficking, brutal homicides, and 

sexual and gender-based violence, among other challenges. This increased 

violence has contributed to a spike in unaccompanied minors arriving in the 

United States, from around 6,000 in FY 2010 to some 53,000 in the first three 

quarters of FY 2014. According to UNHCR, the number of people from these 

three countries seeking asylum in Belize, Costa Rica, Mexico, Nicaragua, and 

Panama increased by more than seven times between 2008 and 2013.

Religious Freedom

In Latin America and the Caribbean, religious freedom is widely 

recognized and supported by government and society, though there are cases of 

religious intolerance. In some isolated instances, Christian groups, mainly 

Evangelicals, Protestants, and Mormons have reported impediments or 

complications to their practice of religion, establishment of religious institutions, 

and importation of religious materials. In some areas, there is harassment of 

Muslims, anti-Muslim cartoons and speech, and marginalization of Afro and 

indigenous religions. In Cuba, significant government restrictions remain in 

place. 

Although the constitution protects religious freedom, the Government of 

Cuba continues to monitor aspects of religious life, including interference in 

church affairs, surveillance of religious institutions, and harassment of outspoken 

church leaders. The U.S. Refugee Admissions Program in Havana offers Cubans 

who have been persecuted on a number of grounds, including their religious 

beliefs, the opportunity for permanent resettlement in the United States. 

Manifestations of anti-Semitism that occurred throughout the hemisphere at 

times appeared correlated to the unfolding transitions to democracy in other parts 

of the world. In Venezuela, anti-Semitism is a growing concern, including 

instances of anti-Semitism in the government-controlled media. 
44

Voluntary Repatriation

Given the threats and violence in Colombia from illegal armed groups 

(non-state actors) and the lack of state presence to provide full protection in some 

areas, UNHCR has not been actively promoting repatriation of Colombian 

refugees.

Local Integration 

The Governments of Costa Rica, Ecuador, Panama, and Venezuela have 

maintained policies that theoretically allow Colombians in need of protection to 

obtain asylum and integrate locally, although the processes involved are usually 

slow and cumbersome. The governments' capacity to review applications and 

confer refugee status remains limited. Even registered refugees with the right to 

work in these countries struggle to find stable employment or income 

opportunities, competing with the large number of poor in host communities. 

Colombians seeking international protection face high levels of discrimination 

and xenophobia, and the ability to locally integrate in some areas is difficult.

Furthermore, refugees do not live in camps, but rather the large majority live in 

urban areas. Some Colombian persons of concern (including refugees and 

asylum seekers) in Ecuador, Costa Rica, Panama, and Venezuela continue to 

experience harassment by persons associated with armed Colombian groups 

operating in these countries. Security remains a major concern for the 

Government of Panama, and Panamanians often equate refugees with drug 

trafficking and crime. 

The Department of State is currently supporting UNHCR’s efforts to assist 

the Dominican Republic and other Caribbean countries in developing systems for 

conducting refugee status determinations for asylum seekers, including 

Haitians. The opening of a UNHCR office in the Dominican Republic in 2010 

and the agency’s continued presence in Haiti have contributed greatly to its

ability to address the protection needs of refugees, asylum-seekers, and displaced 

and stateless persons in mixed migration flows throughout the region. In June 

2012, the Dominican Republic’s refugee eligibility committee (CONARE) first 

met. Prior to this meeting, the CONARE had not made a decision on an asylum 

claim since 2005 and had not made more than 20 decisions since UNHCR handed 

over responsibility for refugee status determinations to the government in 1997. 

Since the 2012 meeting CONARE remains paralyzed with only a few cases 

adjudicated. All cases have been rejected.
45

Third and In-Country Resettlement 

In the past, local integration had been the solution best suited to regional 

refugee problems in Latin America. In recent years, however, third-country 

resettlement has become an important alternative for those who face physical 

risks and have urgent protection needs. Canada, New Zealand, Sweden, 

Denmark, Norway, and the United States offer resettlement to at-risk Colombian 

refugees. Currently, the United States accepts referrals from UNHCR and 

embassies in the region and processes these cases principally in Ecuador, with 

occasional cases in Costa Rica and other countries throughout the region. Under 

the “Solidarity Resettlement Program,” a component of the Mexico Plan of 

Action which sought regional solutions to the Colombian refugee issue, countries 

in the region including Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Uruguay are working with 

UNHCR to resettle a modest number of Colombian refugees. The Department of 

State is providing technical support to bolster Uruguay’s resettlement program. 

The United States also facilitates the resettlement to third countries of persons 

interdicted by the U.S. Coast Guard or who enter Guantanamo Naval Station 

directly and are found by DHS/USCIS to have a well-founded fear of persecution 

or to be more likely than not to face torture if repatriated to their country of 

origin. From 1996 to date, approximately 400 such protected persons have been 

resettled to 20 countries worldwide.

The U.S. government operates an in-country refugee resettlement program 

in Cuba. The number of persons seeking refugee resettlement remains high, 

although the backlog of cases pending review by the Department of State for 

access to the USRAP has been significantly reduced. This backlog of cases 

contains a shrinking pool of qualified applicants and an increasing rate of 

fraudulent applications; as such, an unknown number are likely ineligible for the 

program. Additional Department of State resources are being applied to address 

the backlogged cases, and we expect the backlog will continue to decrease for 

cases seeking access to the program by the end of FY 2015. Recent upgrades to 

the Refugee Annex have been completed, thus allowing the Mission to expand 

Cultural Orientation classes for approved U.S.-bound applicants. Some approved 

refugees do not have sufficient funds to pay for the medical exams and passports 

needed to depart Cuba, delaying their departure. The exit permit requirement was 

abolished on January 14, 2013. The Refugee Section has not received any recent 

information regarding individuals who have been prevented by the Cuban 

government from traveling.
46

Cubans eligible to apply for admission to the United States through the incountry program include the following:

1. Former political prisoners;

2. Active members of persecuted religious minorities;

3. Human rights activists, long-standing members;

4. Forced labor conscripts (1965-68); and

5. Persons deprived of their professional credentials or subjected to other 

disproportionately harsh or discriminatory treatment resulting from their 

perceived or actual political or religious beliefs.

The U.S. government plans to launch in-country refugee programs in 

Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala for unmarried children under 21 of certain 

lawfully present qualifying relatives residing in the United States. Decisions on 

several program parameters are still being considered by the Departments of State 

and Homeland Security and will be briefed to Congress before the program is 

implemented. 

FY 2014 U.S. Admissions

We anticipate admitting more than 4,000 refugees from Latin America and 

the Caribbean during FY 2014. Cubans compose the overwhelming majority of 

refugees resettled from the region. Historically, most Cuban admissions were 

former political prisoners and forced labor conscripts. The program was 

expanded in 1991 to include human rights activists, displaced professionals, and 

others with claims of persecution, which currently compose the majority of 

admissions. We expect about 500 Colombian refugees to be admitted to the 

United States during FY 2014.

FY 2015 U.S. Resettlement Program

The proposed 4,000 ceiling for Latin America and the Caribbean for FY 

2015 comprises Cuban refugees eligible for the in-country Priority 2 program; a 

small number of UNHCR-referred Priority 1 Colombians; as well as a small 

number of Priority 3 family reunification cases. Depending on when the incountry P-2 program for minors in Central America is launched, a small number 

might be admitted in late FY 2015. 
47

Proposed FY 2015 Latin America program to include arrivals from the 

following categories: 

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 700

Priority 2* 3,250

Priority 3 Family Reunification 50

Total Proposed Ceiling 4,000

*to include in-country Cubans and in-country minors in 

Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala.

NEAR EAST AND SOUTH ASIA

The Near East/South Asia region remains host to more than eight million 

refugees, primarily Afghans, Bhutanese, Iranians, Iraqis, Palestinians, Sri 

Lankans, Tibetans, and now Syrians. Few countries in the region are party to the 

1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and/or its 1967 Protocol. 

Nonetheless, many host governments tolerate the presence of refugees within 

their borders.

UNHCR, ICRC, IOM, WFP, UNRWA, and other humanitarian 

organizations work with refugees in the region. Some countries have provided 

long-term protection and/or asylum, mainly to Tibetans, Bhutanese, Sri Lankans, 

Palestinians, Afghans, Somalis, Syrians, and a handful of other nationalities. 

Refugees identified by UNHCR for third-country resettlement include Iraqis in 

Jordan, Syria, Turkey, Lebanon, Egypt, Yemen, and the Gulf States; Bhutanese in 

Nepal; Afghans in Pakistan, Iran, Turkey, Syria, and India; and Iranians in 

Turkey. In 2014, UNHCR also began to refer several thousand vulnerable Syrian 

refugees residing in Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq and Egypt to a number of 

resettlement countries. 

As of February 28, 2014, 88,991 Iraqi refugees were registered with 

UNHCR in the region. There is no internationally agreed-upon number of Iraqi 

refugees and internally displaced persons due to the fact that not all are registered 

with UNHCR and they are dispersed throughout the region. UNHCR reports that 

approximately 950,000 Iraqis displaced by sectarian violence following the 

Samarra Mosque bombing of February 2006 remain internally displaced, and the 

Government of Iraq’s Ministry of Migration and Displacement reports that an 

additional 440,000 Iraqis have been displaced since January 2014 by violence in 
48

Anbar province. As of March 30, 2014, there were 219,579 Syrian refugees in 

Iraq, as well as approximately 36,000 refugees and 6,500 asylum seekers of other 

origins (including Palestinians and Iranian Kurds).

Intense fighting in Syria has caused massive displacement, both internally 

and to countries in the region. As of April 15, 2014, there were approximately 

2.7 million Syrian refugees in Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey, Iraq, and Egypt. The 

U.S. government is providing humanitarian assistance to refugees from Syria 

throughout the region through support to international organizations, such as 

UNHCR, UNICEF, UNRWA, UNFPA, IOM, ICRC, and WFP, as well as 

through non-governmental organizations, which are providing critical assistance 

such as water and sanitation, shelter, and medical care. As of April 24, 2014, the 

U.S. government had provided more than $1.7 billion in critical humanitarian 

assistance.

Despite the voluntary repatriation of over 5.8 million Afghan refugees 

since 2002, Pakistan and Iran continue to host, respectively, approximately 1.6 

million and 800,000 registered Afghans, many of whom have resided in these 

countries for decades. The maintenance of asylum and protection space for those 

refugees who cannot yet return to Afghanistan while continuing to support 

voluntary repatriation, is a top priority for the U.S. government and for UNHCR. 

In addition to Afghan refugees, some 2-3 million Afghans are believed to live and 

work in Pakistan and Iran as economic migrants without documentation. There 

are more than 27,000 registered Afghan asylum-seekers in Turkey and an 

estimated 40,000 total (registered and unregistered), many of whom fled from 

Iran. Over 11,000 Afghan refugees and asylum seekers are also registered with 

UNHCR in India. Identifying durable solutions remains an important component 

of UNHCR’s strategy in India. Local integration in South Asia remains a 

difficult option due to opposition from host countries.

Thousands of ethnic Nepalis in Bhutan were forced out of Bhutan in the 

early 1990s as a result of the Bhutanese government’s policy of “one nation and 

one people” (also referred to as “Bhutanization”). Despite 17 rounds of formal 

negotiations between Bhutan and Nepal, and pressure from the United States and 

other governments to resolve the issue and secure the right of return for genuine 

Bhutanese nationals, particularly humanitarian cases, to date none have been 

permitted to return. Due to concerted resettlement efforts commenced in late 

2007 by the United States and other resettlement countries, approximately 90,000 

of the original population of 108,000 Bhutanese refugees in Nepal have departed 

after spending two decades in camps in eastern Nepal. The U.S. government 

continues to press the Government of Bhutan to help resolve this protracted 
49

situation by accepting the return of eligible refugees who wish to repatriate. 

Similarly, the U.S. government encourages the Government of Nepal to allow 

local integration of the remaining refugees. 

Religious Freedom

Persecution of religious groups is common in many countries in the Middle 

East and South Asia that are countries of origin for refugee populations entering 

the United States. State and local government responses to violence against 

members of religious groups, particularly Muslims and Christians, are often 

inadequate. Although many of these countries do not have Jewish populations, 

anti-Semitism is prevalent, and often espoused by governments or religious 

leaders, especially in Iran.

In Afghanistan, religious freedom is limited due to constitutional 

contradictions, legislative ambiguity, and interpretations of Islamic law that 

punish apostasy and blasphemy.

In Pakistan, the penal code includes blasphemy laws that carry 

punishments ranging from imprisonment to the death penalty. Frequent abuses of 

these laws negatively affect religious minorities, both Muslims and non-Muslims. 

In 2013, 34 new cases were registered under the blasphemy law, and 18 Ahmadis 

were arrested in matters related to their faith, though at least one death sentence 

for blasphemy was overturned, and the government has yet to carry out a death 

sentence for blasphemy. Nevertheless, at least 17 people are awaiting execution 

for blasphemy, and at least 20 others are serving life sentences. 

In Sri Lanka, religious tensions continue to be a problem, and Muslim, 

Hindu, and Buddhist communities often distrust one another. In 2013, local 

authorities failed to respond effectively to communal violence, including attacks 

on members of minority religious groups, and perpetrators were not brought to 

justice. Authorities failed to prevent the destruction of a Hindu temple in 

Dambulla and an attack on the Grandpass Mosque in Colombo. 

Nongovernmental organizations alleged that senior and local government officials 

provided assistance to or, at a minimum, tacit support for the actions of societal 

groups targeting religious minorities.

In Bhutan, Buddhism is the state’s “spiritual heritage,” although in the 

southern areas many citizens openly practice Hinduism. While subtle pressure on 

non-Buddhists to observe the traditional Buddhist values and some limitations on 

constructing non-Buddhist religious buildings remain, the government has taken 

steps to improve religious freedom in the country. Some societal pressures 

toward non-Buddhists are reflected in official and unofficial efforts to uphold the 

“spiritual heritage” (Buddhism) of the country.
50

In Iran, religious groups, including Sunni Muslims, Baha’is, Sufis, Jews, 

Zoroastrians, Yaresanis, and Christians, continue to face official discrimination, 

harassment, and arrest. Members of the Shia community who express religious 

views different from those of the government are also subject to harassment and 

intimidation. The government continues convictions and executions of dissidents, 

political reformists, and peaceful protesters on the charge of moharebeh (enmity 

against God) and anti-Islamic propaganda.

Increasing sectarian violence, while generally centered around Sunni-Shia 

divisions, impacts all of Iraq’s religious communities. Iraq’s minority 

communities, including Christians, Yezidis, Sabean-Mandaeans, and others, have 

experienced wide-scale displacement. Some 20 percent of registered Iraqi 

refugees are members of religious minorities, a figure appreciably larger than 

their percentage of the overall Iraqi population. As a result, some of these 

religious communities, along with their ancient languages and customs, are on the 

verge of disappearing.

In Syria, the government increased its targeting and surveillance of 

members of faith groups it deemed a “threat,” including members of the country’s 

Sunni majority. This occurred concurrently with the escalation of violent 

extremist activity targeting Christians and other religious minorities as the current 

civil war continues. Large-scale internal and external displacement of all sectors 

of the population was ongoing.

In Egypt, the government generally failed to prevent, investigate, or 

prosecute crimes against members of religious minority groups, especially Coptic 

Christians – including the recent attack at the Cathedral of St. Mark, the seat of 

the Coptic Orthodox Pope. This fostered a culture of impunity. Christians, Shias, 

Bahais, and other minorities faced personal and collective discrimination, 

especially in government employment and the ability to build, renovate, and 

repair places of worship. The government routinely failed to condemn and 

sometimes contributed to incendiary speech, including anti-Semitic, antiChristian, and anti-Shia speech.

In some countries in the region, most notably Afghanistan, Iran, Saudi 

Arabia, Pakistan, and Egypt, blasphemy, apostasy, and defamation of religion 

laws are used to restrict religious liberty, constrain the rights of religious 

minorities, and limit freedom of expression, and those accused face threats of 

violence. Under these governments’ interpretations of Islamic law, individuals 

have their civil rights infringed upon if any member of society files a complaint 

against them. In most countries in the region Sharia courts decide personal status 
51

cases. Iran and Saudi Arabia are designated by the Department of State as CPCs 

under the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 for systematic, ongoing, 

and egregious violations of religious freedom. 

The USRAP provides resettlement access in various ways to refugees who 

suffer religious persecution. Under the Specter Amendment, Iranian religious 

minorities designated as Priority 2 category members are considered under a 

reduced evidentiary standard for establishing a well-founded fear of persecution. 

Iranian refugees have also gained access to the program through Priority 3. In 

addition, the USRAP accepts UNHCR and embassy referrals of religious 

minorities of various nationalities in the region. Nationals of any country, 

including CPCs, may be referred to the U.S. program by UNHCR or a U.S. 

embassy for reasons of religious persecution.

Voluntary Repatriation

After the fall of the Taliban in 2001, voluntary repatriation to Afghanistan 

proceeded on a massive scale for several years, both with and without UNHCR 

assistance. Since 2002, over 5.8 million Afghan refugees have returned, mostly 

from Pakistan and Iran. Over 4.7 million have been assisted by UNHCR in the 

largest repatriation operation in UNHCR’s history. However, the era of mass 

returns has largely ended, with about 39,000 returning in 2013. The substantial 

repatriation represents roughly 20 percent of Afghanistan’s total population and 

has taxed the country’s capacity to absorb them, let alone additional refugee 

returns.

It is unlikely that all of the remaining 2.4 million registered Afghans in 

Pakistan and Iran will repatriate. UNHCR and IOM’s assessment is that the 

continuing migration of Afghans in both directions across the AfghanistanPakistan border is part of a larger process of economic and social migration that 

has been occurring for centuries. UNHCR is working with the Governments of 

Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iran and the international community to develop 

policies and programs to sustain voluntary returns. They are also working to 

better manage the residual Afghan population in Pakistan by working toward 

longer-term protection and migration solutions. IOM is seeking a greater role in 

border management and in developing regional mechanisms for economic 

migration that would bolster protection for Afghans. The Government of the 

Islamic Republic of Afghanistan is working to increase its capacity in helping 

returnees fold back into Afghan economic and social structures and at the same 

time prioritizes continued protection for Afghan citizens still seeking refuge 

abroad. UNHCR, together with the Governments of Afghanistan, Iran, and 

Pakistan, continue to work toward implementing the Solutions Strategy for 
52

Afghan Refugees to Support Voluntary Repatriation, Sustainable Reintegration 

and Assistance to Host Countries (SSAR). The SSAR provides for the orderly, 

voluntary return of Afghan refugees and emphasizes the need to reintegrate 

returned refugees into their communities fully. 

Stabilizing the displaced Afghan population – e.g., reintegrating returning 

refugees and IDPs into Afghan society and preserving asylum space for refugees 

in neighboring countries – is critical to regional stability, as is addressing 

irregular migration. Through a unique quadripartite consultative process, UNHCR 

and the Governments of Afghanistan, Iran, and Pakistan have agreed on a multiyear regional strategy, endorsed by the international community in May 2012 to 

address assistance to Afghan refugees and returnees, emphasizing cross-border 

linkages. The Afghan government has also adopted a national IDP policy which 

seeks to address protection, assistance, and durable solutions issues for displaced 

populations within its borders. With assistance from UNHCR and others, the 

Afghan government plans to begin implementing the IDP policy in 2015.

Since 2008, more than 1.2 million IDPs and refugees have returned to their 

homes in Iraq, with IDPs comprising 76 percent of these returns. About 81 

percent of all returns have been to Baghdad and Diyala, a province northeast of 

Baghdad. This trend generally matches displacement patterns as over 80 percent 

of all the pre-2014 IDPs and 70 percent of all refugees were displaced from those 

locations. UNHCR will assist Iraqis in neighboring countries wishing to return to 

Iraq by facilitating voluntary return, but it is not encouraging returns at this time. 

In 2012, nearly 85,000 Iraqi refugees, approximately 56,500 of whom were living 

in Syria, returned to Iraq and registered for assistance through the Iraqi 

government or UNHCR. UNHCR reported no voluntary repatriations of Iraqis 

from Syria between January and July 2013 and only limited voluntary 

repatriations, 1,281 individuals, from other countries in the region during the 

same time period. 

The United States continues to work with other interested governments in 

urging the Government of Bhutan to allow for the voluntary repatriation of 

Bhutanese refugees to Bhutan under acceptable terms and conditions. With the 

end of the conflict in Sri Lanka, approximately 12,000 refugees have returned. 

However, the number of Tamils seeking to return from India has decreased. So 

far in 2014, UNHCR assisted in the voluntary return of 111 Tamil refugees to Sri 

Lanka. 
53

Local Integration 

The SSAR promotes enhancing support for refugee-hosting communities 

and providing some alternative stay arrangements for refugees in Afghanistan and 

Iran. While some progress is being made, few countries in the region offer local 

integration to refugees. In July 2013, the Government of Pakistan endorsed the 

policies found in the National Policy on Management and Repatriation of Afghan 

Refugees beyond 30th June, 2013. At the same meeting, the Cabinet extended the 

validity of Afghan Proof of Registration cards and the Tripartite Agreement 

(among the governments of Afghanistan and Pakistan and UNHCR) until 

December 31, 2015. As part of the Pakistan implementation of the SSAR and in 

partnership with the Government of Pakistan and UN agencies, UNHCR launched 

the Refugee-Affected and Hosting Areas (RAHA) initiative in 2009. This 

program is widely regarded as a success in addressing Afghan refugee and 

Pakistani host community needs by rehabilitating areas that have been adversely 

affected by the presence of Afghan refugee communities over the past 30 years. 

The United States will continue to work with UNHCR and the Government of 

Pakistan to preserve asylum space and promote alternative stay arrangements. 

However, at present, local integration is not an option for most of the Afghan 

refugees. 

Syria hosted more than 29,000 UNHCR-registered Iraqi refugees as of 

January 31, 2014. Iraqis do not need a visa to enter Syria. They receive a stamp 

upon entry, which allows for six months of residence and should be renewed at 

the local government offices. Because of the continuing violence in Syria, many 

Iraqis have fled the country. The Government of Jordan (GOJ) requires visas for 

Iraqis and has instituted an additional visa category for Iraqis coming to Jordan 

from Syria since unrest broke out in Syria in 2011. The GOJ continues to 

preserve first asylum and protection space for Iraqi refugees and remains a 

generous host.

Iraqis in Syria and Jordan are not legally defined as refugees, but rather as 

guests. Both governments allow UNHCR to register Iraqis. With help from the 

international community, the Governments of Syria and Jordan have allowed 

Iraqi students to enroll in public schools. However, enrollments in both countries 

have been lower than anticipated. In both Syria and Jordan, Iraqi refugees have 

access to the public health care systems. Although the Government of Jordan has 

granted access to several legal labor sectors to Iraqis, few have obtained work 

permits as they are also required to obtain residency permits, which the GOJ is 

not issuing to Iraqis. Iraqis do not have access to the legal labor market in Syria.
54

The Government of Iraq has acknowledged that many Iraqi IDPs will not 

be able to return to their home communities, and instead require support 

integrating into their areas of displacement. UNHCR and other international 

partners are also seeking to support local integration as a viable option for IDPs, 

but they point out that, in addition to the integration grant, it will be important for 

displaced Iraqis to be able to access services in their areas of displacement.

While Turkey ratified the 1951 UN Refugee Convention and acceded to its 

1967 Protocol, the Turkish government acceded to the Protocol with a geographic 

limitation acknowledging refugees only from Europe. While most asylum 

seekers are thus not considered refugees under Turkish law, the Turkish 

government grants temporary refuge and temporary local integration possibilities 

to refugees recognized by UNHCR usually pending their referral to a potential 

resettlement country. As of January 31, 2014, there were more than 40,000 

persons registered with UNHCR Turkey, the majority from Iraq (42%), 

Afghanistan (24%) and Iran (20%). In addition to the Syrian influx into Turkey 

over the past year, Turkey has also seen substantial, increased arrivals of Iraqis 

due to the increased violence in neighboring Iraq. UNHCR-recognized refugees 

and asylum seekers in Turkey are assigned to one of 64 satellite cities. Provincial 

governments are responsible for meeting their basic needs, including by providing 

access to employment, healthcare, and education although support varies from 

one location to another. On April 4, 2013, the Turkish Parliament passed the 

“Foreigners and International Protection Law,” which will regulate the entry, exit, 

and the stay of migrants in the country, along with the scope of international 

protection for those who seek asylum in Turkey. The law went into full 

implementation on April 11, 2014. 

Despite the increasing number of asylum seekers and refugees, India does 

not have a clear national policy for the treatment of refugees, and UNHCR has a 

limited mandate in the country. In New Delhi, urban refugees face difficult 

conditions, including discrimination and harassment by the local population, 

limiting their local integration prospects. India permits UNHCR to assist urban 

refugees in New Delhi, primarily Burmese, Afghans, and Somalis. India 

recognizes and aids certain groups, including Sri Lankan Tamils and Tibetans in 

the 112 camps for Sri Lankans and 39 settlements for Tibetans located throughout 

the country. The Government of India provides support and benefits to registered 

Tibetan and Sri Lankan refugees. It also grants work authorization to 

documented Tibetans. However, Sri Lankan refugees in India do not receive 

work authorization from the central government but are unofficially allowed to 

work on the informal economy. 
55

UNHCR has negotiated an agreement with the Government of India 

whereby India would facilitate access to citizenship for Hindu and Sikh Afghan 

refugees who meet the standard criteria to acquire Indian citizenship, while 

UNHCR would pursue resettlement opportunities for other long-staying ethnic 

Afghan refugees. Naturalization clinics were established to support the 

citizenship process for Hindu and Sikh Afghans, and UNHCR intensified its 

efforts to ensure that all eligible refugees had submitted applications for Indian 

citizenship by December 31, 2009. As a result, over 4,400 applications were 

submitted and over 680 Afghans have naturalized. 

Third-Country Resettlement

The USRAP anticipates the continued large-scale processing of Iraqis, and, 

to a lesser extent, Bhutanese and Iranians, and the launch of significant 

processing of Syrians during FY 2015. As of mid-June 2014, RSC pre-screening 

and USCIS adjudications in Baghdad were suspended due to the relocation of 

personnel outside Iraq. It is unclear when they will resume. Applicants who 

were approved by USCIS prior to the suspension continue to depart as security 

and medical checks are cleared. 

In late 2013, UNHCR announced its intention to refer 30,000 Syrian 

refugees for resettlement in third countries by the end of 2014 and up to 100,000 

additional Syrian refugees by 2016. The United States will play a significant role 

in this effort. The majority of Syrian referrals will be processed in Turkey, 

Jordan, Lebanon, and to a lesser extent in Egypt, and the Iraqi Kurdistan Region. 

As of August 2014, UNHCR had referred some 2,500 Syrians for U.S. 

resettlement consideration and we expect this number to rise dramatically in the 

second half of the year, including individuals with close family ties in the U.S. 

Those who are approved will begin to arrive in FY 2015. 

The United States recognizes that the possibility of third-country 

resettlement must be available to the most vulnerable Iraqi refugees, and has 

processing facilities in Amman, Baghdad, Beirut, Cairo, Damascus, and Istanbul. 

While many Iraqis gain access to the USRAP via a referral from UNHCR, we are 

also facilitating direct access to the USRAP for Iraqis with close U.S. affiliations 

in a limited number of countries in the region. The Refugee Crisis in Iraq Act, 

enacted January 28, 2008, created categories of Iraqis who are eligible for direct 

access (P-2) to the USRAP, both inside and outside Iraq. Currently, beneficiaries 

of P-2 categories who may seek access to the USRAP in Jordan, Egypt, Iraq, and 

the UAE include: 
56

1. Iraqis who work/worked on a full-time basis as interpreters/translators 

for the U.S. Government, MNF-I in Iraq, or U.S. Forces-Iraq; 

2. Iraqis who are/were employed by the U.S. Government in Iraq; 

3. Iraqis who are/were employees of an organization or entity closely 

associated with the U.S. mission in Iraq that has received U.S. 

Government funding through an official and documented contract,

award, grant or cooperative agreement;

4. Iraqis who are/were employed in Iraq by a U.S.-based media 

organization or non-governmental organization; 

5. Spouses, sons, daughters, parents, and siblings of individuals described 

in the four categories above, or of an individual eligible for a Special 

Immigrant Visa as a result of his/her employment by or on behalf of the 

U.S. Government in Iraq, including if the individual is no longer alive, 

provided that the relationship is verified; and

6. Iraqis who are the spouses, sons, daughters, parents, brothers, or sisters 

of a citizen of the United States, or who are the spouses or unmarried 

sons or daughters of a Permanent Resident Alien of the United States, as 

established by their being or becoming beneficiaries of approved 

family-based I-130 Immigrant Visa Petitions.

The United States has increased its in-country processing capacity nearly 

300 percent since establishing a Resettlement Support Center in Baghdad in FY 

2008. Although security and logistical challenges associated with operating an 

RSC in Iraq limit in-country processing capacity, refugee admissions from Iraq 

are exceeding those from neighboring countries. Refugee processing in Iraq is a 

high priority for the United States as it directly benefits Iraqis associated with 

U.S. efforts in Iraq. DHS continues to devote substantial resources to Iraqi 

refugee processing and maintains a robust interview schedule in the region, 

except in Iraq, as of June 2014. 

Middle Eastern and South Asian refugees in most of Europe avail 

themselves of the asylum systems of the countries in which they are located. In 

Vienna, however, certain Iranian religious minorities (Baha’is, Zoroastrians, 

Jews, Mandaeans, and Christians) may be processed for U.S. resettlement using 

special procedures authorized by the Government of Austria. The Lautenberg 

legislation expired in September 2012 and was subsequently re-authorized in 

March 2013, allowing new applications to be filed and adjudicated under 

Lautenberg guidelines. The United States also processes Iranian religious 

minorities (primarily Baha’i) and other Iranians in Turkey through special 

procedures involving fast-track refugee status determination and referral by 

UNHCR.
57

Resettlement processing for Bhutanese refugees in Nepal is continuing 

smoothly and the United States remains committed to considering for 

resettlement as many refugees as have expressed interest. As of June 2014, 

UNHCR had referred over 105,000 Bhutanese refugees for resettlement to eight 

countries and more than 90,000 of these Bhutanese refugees have been resettled 

to these countries – most notably the United States – since late 2007. In April 

2014, UNHCR and eight other participating resettlement countries requested that 

all Bhutanese refugees who were interested in resettlement declare their interest 

to UNHCR by June 30, 2014. This deadline allowed UNHCR and donor 

countries to better understand resource needs for the final phase of the 

resettlement program and continued assistance to the residual population that will 

remain in Nepal. Processing of Bhutanese refugees who have declared interest in 

resettlement will take several more years.

The United States works with Australia and other countries to preserve 

protection space and to coordinate the resettlement of Afghans from Pakistan; we 

anticipate overall increased UNHCR referrals in coming years with a larger 

percentage being directed to the United States. In India, UNHCR currently refers 

some 400 individuals per year, with priority given to those they deem most 

vulnerable. The majority of referrals are Burmese. UNHCR also refers a very 

limited number of refugees out of Sri Lanka, mostly Pakistanis. We continue to 

explore modalities for processing vulnerable Tibetan refugees in the region.

FY 2014 U.S. Admissions

We estimate the admission of approximately 34,000 refugees from the 

region in FY 2014. These will include some 9,000 Bhutanese, 19,000 Iraqis, 

3,000 Iranians, and several hundred Afghans, including women who had been 

living in Iran processed through the UNHCR Emergency Transit Center in 

Slovakia. 

FY 2015 U.S. Resettlement Program

The proposed regional ceiling for refugees from the Near East and South 

Asia for FY 2015 is 33,000, including vulnerable Iraqis, Bhutanese, Iranians, 

Syrians, Pakistanis, and Afghans. We expect individual UNHCR referrals of 

various religious and ethnic groups in the region, including Assyrians, Mandeans, 

Iranian Kurds, and Syrian Kurds. In addition, Ahmadi Muslims in many 

locations and Afghans in the former Soviet Union, Pakistan, India, and elsewhere 

will be included. 
58

Proposed FY 2015 Near East/ South Asia program to include arrivals from the 

following categories: 

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 18,450

Priority 2 Groups 14,500

Priority 3 Family Reunification 50

Total Proposed Ceiling 33,000
59

DOMESTIC IMPACT OF REFUGEE ADMISSIONS

In FY 2013, the USRAP admitted 69,926 refugees from 53 countries. 

More than half were originally from either Iraq or Burma. (See Table III.)

The demographic characteristics of refugee arrivals from the 20 largest 

source countries (representing 100 percent of total arrivals) in FY 2013 illustrate 

the variation among refugee groups. The median age of all FY 2013 arrivals was 

25 years and ranged from 19 years for arrivals from the Democratic Republic of 

Congo, Central African Republic, and Burundi to 35 years of age for arrivals 

from Cuba and Iran. In FY 2013, 45.95 percent of all arriving refugees were 

female and 54.05 percent of all arriving refugees were male. Males predominated 

among refugees from Sudan (79.5 percent), Eritrea (59.9 percent), and Pakistan 

(57.5 percent). (See Table IV.)

Of the total arrivals in FY 2013, some 9.2 percent were under the age of 

five, 24.5 percent were of school age, 66.2 percent were of working age, and 3.4 

percent were of retirement age. (See Table V.) Considerable variation among 

refugee groups can be seen among specific age categories. Refugees under the 

age of five ranged from a high of 13.8 percent among Central African Republic 

arrivals to a low of 2.4 percent of those from Iran. The number of school-aged 

children (from five to 17 years of age) varied from a high of over 43.5 percent of 

arrivals from Burundi to a low of 11.3 percent of those from Iran. The number of

working-aged refugees (16 to 64 years of age) varied from a high of 78.8 percent 

of those from Iran to a low of 46.5 percent of individuals from the Central 

African Republic. Retirement-aged refugees (65 years or older) ranged from a 

high of 9.4 percent of arrivals from the Former Soviet Union to a low of less than 

one percent of those from Burundi. 

During FY 2013, 63 percent of all arriving refugees resettled in 12 states. 

The majority were placed in Texas (10.7 percent), followed by California (9.1 

percent), Michigan (6.6 percent), New York (5.7 percent), Florida (5.2 percent), 

and Arizona (4.4 percent). The states of Ohio (4.0 percent), Georgia (3.9 

percent), Pennsylvania (3.6 percent), Illinois (3.5 percent), Washington (3.4 

percent), and North Carolina (3.4 percent) also were in the top twelve states 

where refugees were resettled. (See Table VI.)
60

TABLE III

Refugee Arrivals By Country of Origin

Fiscal Year 2013

Country of Origin

Arrival 

Number

% of 

Total

Afghanistan 661 0.95%

Angola 6 0.01%

Bangladesh 1 0.00%

Bhutan 9,134 13.06%

Bulgaria 1 0.00%

Burma 16,299 23.31%

Burundi 193 0.28%

Cambodia 30 0.04%

Canada 1 0.00%

Central African Republic 318 0.45%

Chad 32 0.05%

China 86 0.12%

Colombia 230 0.33%

Congo 161 0.23%

Cuba 4,205 6.01%

Dem. Rep. Congo 2,563 3.67%

Egypt 3 0.00%

Eritrea 1,824 2.61%

Ethiopia 765 1.09%

Former Soviet Union* 579 0.83%

Gambia 11 0.02%

Guinea 9 0.01%

India 3 0.00%

Iran 2,578 3.69%

Iraq 19,488 27.87%

Ivory Coast 20 0.03%
61

Jordan 13 0.02%

Kenya 5 0.01%

Korea, North 17 0.02%

Kuwait 12 0.02%

Liberia 94 0.13%

Libya 1 0.00%

Mali 2 0.00%

Nepal 34 0.05%

Nigeria 2 0.00%

Pakistan 158 0.23%

Palestine 164 0.23%

Republic of South Sudan 17 0.02%

Rwanda 139 0.20%

Senegal 2 0.00%

Sierra Leone 4 0.01%

Somalia 7,608 10.88%

Sri Lanka (Ceylon) 92 0.13%

Sudan 2,160 3.09%

Syria 36 0.05%

Thailand 4 0.01%

Tibet 15 0.02%

Togo 18 0.03%

Uganda 15 0.02%

Venezuela 3 0.00%

Vietnam 86 0.12%

Yemen 12 0.02%

Zimbabwe 12 0.02%

TOTAL 69,926 100.00%

Source: Department of State, Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration, Refugee Processing Center
62

TABLE IV

Median Age and Gender of Refugee Arrivals, Fiscal Year 2013

Rank

(# of 

Arrivals) Country of Origin

Refugees

Admitted

Median

Age

%

Females

%

Males

1 Iraq 19,488 28 47.19% 52.81%

2 Burma 16,299 23 43.95% 56.05%

3 Bhutan 9,134 28 49.09% 50.91%

4 Somalia 7,608 22 45.87% 54.13%

5 Cuba 4,205 35 48.51% 51.49%

6 Iran 2,578 35 48.10% 51.90%

7 Dem. Rep. Congo 2,563 19 50.80% 49.20%

8 Sudan 2,160 27 24.44% 75.56%

9 Eritrea 1,824 23 40.02% 59.98%

10 Ethiopia 765 23 45.88% 54.12%

11 Afghanistan 661 23 46.29% 53.71%

12 Former Soviet Union* 579 30 51.12% 48.88%

13 Central African Republic 318 19 45.60% 54.40%

14 Colombia 230 21 50.43% 49.57%

15 Burundi 193 19 51.81% 48.19%

16 Palestine 164 27 51.22% 48.78%

17 Congo 161 25 48.45% 51.55%

18 Pakistan 158 25 42.41% 57.59%

19 Rwanda 139 23 60.43% 39.57%

20 Liberia 94 23 54.26% 45.74%

21 All Other Countries 605 27 45.45% 54.55%

TOTAL 69,926 25 45.94% 54.06%

Source: Department of State, Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration, Refugee Processing Center
63

TABLE V

Select Age Categories of Refugee Arrivals, Fiscal Year 2013

Rank

(# of 

Arrivals) Country of Origin

Under 

5 Yrs

School 

Age 

(5-17)

Working 

Age

(16-64)

Retirement 

Age

(=or > 65)

1 Iraq 8.64% 24.07% 65.35% 5.05%

2 Burma 13.34% 23.44% 65.02% 1.37%

3 Bhutan 7.30% 21.89% 69.49% 5.28%

4 Somalia 9.70% 31.56% 62.20% 0.95%

5 Cuba 4.23% 20.74% 72.63% 6.21%

6 Iran 2.44% 11.37% 78.90% 9.23%

7 Dem. Rep. Congo 11.74% 40.73% 53.06% 0.51%

8 Sudan 8.56% 16.57% 76.48% 0.56%

9 Eritrea* 7.68% 24.12% 70.83% 0.44%

10 Ethiopia 13.20% 20.13% 69.15% 0.26%

11 Afghanistan 6.51% 33.59% 64.30% 1.21%

12 Former Soviet Union* 9.15% 25.73% 60.45% 9.50%

13 Central African Republic 13.84% 42.77% 46.54% 0.94%

14 Colombia 8.70% 39.13% 55.65% 0.87%

15 Burundi 12.44% 43.52% 48.19% 0.00%

16 Palestine 9.15% 29.88% 59.15% 5.49%

17 Congo 9.32% 32.92% 60.25% 1.86%

18 Pakistan 7.59% 28.48% 66.46% 0.63%

19 Rwanda 4.32% 36.69% 65.47% 0.72%

20 Liberia 5.32% 39.36% 59.57% 1.06%

21 All Other Countries 4.30% 28.10% 71.40% 1.98%

TOTAL 9.29% 24.54% 66.29% 3.42%

NOTE: Totals may exceed 100 percent due to overlapping age categories.

Source: Department of State, Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration, Refugee Processing Center
64

TABLE VI

Refugee Arrivals By State of Initial Resettlement, Fiscal Year 2013

STATE

Refugee 

Arrivals

Amerasian 

Arrivals

Total

Arrivals

% of 

Total Arrivals 

to U.S.

Alabama 129 0 129 0.18%

Alaska 106 0 106 0.15%

Arizona 3,052 0 3,052 4.36%

Arkansas 7 0 7 0.01%

California 6,379 4 6,383 9.13%

Colorado 1,789 0 1,789 2.56%

Connecticut 547 0 547 0.78%

Delaware 6 0 6 0.01%

District of Columbia 11 0 11 0.02%

Florida 3,613 0 3,613 5.17%

Georgia 2,710 0 2,710 3.88%

Hawaii 6 0 6 0.01%

Idaho 920 0 920 1.32%

Illinois 2,453 0 2,453 3.51%

Indiana 1,541 0 1,541 2.20%

Iowa 598 0 598 0.86%

Kansas 474 0 474 0.68%

Kentucky 1,603 0 1,603 2.29%

Louisiana 223 0 223 0.32%

Maine 350 0 350 0.50%

Maryland 1,242 0 1,242 1.78%

Massachusetts 1,829 0 1,829 2.62%

Michigan 4,651 0 4,651 6.65%

Minnesota 2,214 0 2,214 3.17%

Mississippi 3 0 3 0.00%

Missouri 1,268 0 1,268 1.81%

Nebraska 997 0 997 1.43%

Nevada 563 0 563 0.81%

New Hampshire 379 0 379 0.54%

New Jersey 443 0 443 0.63%

New Mexico 293 0 293 0.42%
65

STATE

Refugee 

Arrivals

Amerasian 

Arrivals

Total

Arrivals 

% of 

Total Arrivals 

to U.S.

New York 3,965 0 3,965 5.67%

North Carolina 2,377 0 2,377 3.40%

North Dakota 456 0 456 0.65%

Ohio 2,788 0 2,788 3.99%

Oklahoma 300 0 300 0.43%

Oregon 875 0 875 1.25%

Pennsylvania 2,507 0 2,507 3.59%

Puerto Rico 3 0 3 0.00%

Rhode Island 171 0 171 0.24%

South Carolina 148 0 148 0.21%

South Dakota 533 0 533 0.76%

Tennessee 1,557 0 1,557 2.23%

Texas 7,466 9 7,475 10.69%

Utah 1,189 0 1,189 1.70%

Vermont 322 0 322 0.46%

Virginia 1,472 0 1,472 2.11%

Washington 2,414 0 2,414 3.45%

West Virginia 25 0 25 0.04%

Wisconsin 942 4 946 1.35%

Total 69,909 17 69,926 100.00%

Note: Arrival figures do not reflect secondary migration.

Source: Department of State, Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration, Refugee Processing Center
66

TABLE VII

ESTIMATED AVAILABLE FUNDING FOR REFUGEE PROCESSING, MOVEMENT, AND 

RESETTLEMENT

FY 2014 AND FY 2015 ($ MILLIONS)

AGENCY

ESTIMATED

FY 2014

(BY DEPARTMENT)

ESTIMATED 

FY 2015

(BY DEPARTMENT)

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

United States Citizenship and Immigration Services

 Refugee Processing 1

 $32.3 $32.9

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration

 Refugee Admissions 2, 3

$494.4 $ 418.0

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Administration for Children and Families,

Office of Refugee Resettlement

 Refugee Resettlement 4

 $616.3 $608.1

TOTAL $1,143.0 $1,059.0

The estimated FY 2015 figures above reflect the President’s FY 2015 Budget request and do not 

include carryover funds from FY 2014.

1

FY 2015: Includes cost factors to reflect Headquarters facilities rent related to the refugee 

resettlement program, projected staffing enhancements, and following-to-join refugee 

processing, in addition to certain ICASS costs.

2

FY 2014: Includes FY 2014 MRA appropriation of $351 million, $68.8 million in PRM 

carryover from FY 2013, $68.6 million projected IOM loan collections/carryover, and an 

estimate of $6 million in prior year MRA recoveries. A portion of these funds will be carried 

forward into FY 2015.

3 FY 2015: Includes FY 2015 MRA budget request of $360 million, $52 million in projected 

IOM loan collections/carryover, and an estimate of $6 million in prior year MRA recoveries. 

Funds carried forward from FY 2014 will also be available in FY 2015. 

4

FY 2014 and FY 2015: HHS’s Office of Refugee Resettlement’s (ORR) refugee benefits and 

services are also provided to asylees, Cuban and Haitian entrants, certain Amerasians from 

Vietnam, victims of a severe form of trafficking who have received certification or eligibility 

letters from ORR, and certain family members who are accompanying or following to join 

victims of severe forms of trafficking, and some victims of torture, as well as Iraqi and Afghan 

Special Immigrants and their spouses and unmarried children under the age of 21. None of these 

additional groups is included in the refugee admissions ceiling except Amerasians. This 

category does not include costs associated with the Unaccompanied Alien Children’s Program, 

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Medicaid, Supplemental Security Income 
67

programs, or the Victims of Domestic Trafficking. The estimated FY 2015 figures above reflect 

the President’s FY 2015 Budget request and do not include carryover funds from FY 2014, as 

HHS does not anticipate any carryover funding from FY 2014.
68

TABLE VIII 

UNHCR Resettlement Statistics by Resettlement Country CY 2013 Admissions

RESETTLEMENT 

COUNTRY TOTAL

PERCENT OF TOTAL

RESETTLED

United States 47,875 67.04%

Australia 11,117 15.57%

Canada 5,140 7.20%

Sweden 1,832 2.57%

Germany 1,092 1.53%

Norway 941 1.32%

United Kingdom 750 1.05%

New Zealand 682 0.96%

Finland 665 0.93%

Denmark 475 0.67%

Netherlands 362 0.51%

Belgium 100 0.14%

France 100 0.14%

Switzerland 78 0.11%

Ireland 62 0.09%

Brazil 56 0.08%

Rep. of Korea 31 0.04%

Japan 18 0.03%

Uruguay 14 0.02%

Argentina 7 0.00%

Portugal 6 0.00%

Austria 4 0.00%

Chile 3 0.00%

Czech. Rep. 1 0.00%

TOTAL 71,411 100.00%