Report to Congressional Requesters

United States General Accounting Office

GAO

May 2001 IMMIGRATION

BENEFITS

Several Factors

Impede Timeliness of

Application

Processing

GAO-01-488
Page i GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Letter 1

Appendix I: List of INS Applications and Petitions Processed at the Service

Centers, Districts, and Application Support Centers 51

Appendix II: Description of Major INS Application and Petition Forms 53

Appendix III: INS Naturalization and Adjustment of Status Processing

Flowcharts 54

Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major Types of Applications 60

Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field Offices Visited 80

Appendix VI: INS Valuation Study Results on Pending Application Wait Times

for Selected Field Offices 110

Appendix VII: Comments From the Department of Justice 113

Appendix VIII: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments 114

Tables

Table 1: Funding Sources for INS’ Adjudications and Naturalization

Program 10

Table 2: Onboard Adjudications Staff 11

Table 3: Applications INS Received by Application Type 13

Table 4: Applications INS Completed by Application Type 15

Contents
Page ii GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Table 5: Backlog of Pending Applications by Application Type 16

Table 6: INS’ Production Goals for Naturalization Applications

(Form N-400) 17

Table 7: INS Production Goals for Applications for Adjustment of

Status (Form I-485) 19

Table 8: Valuation Study Results on Wait Times Associated With

Pending Applications as of September 30, 2000 29

Table 9: California Service Center 80

Table 10: Vermont Service Center 85

Table 11: Chicago District 90

Table 12: Houston District 95

Table 13: Los Angeles District 100

Table 14: Miami District 105

Table 15: Valuation Study Results on Wait Times for Naturalization

Applications (Form N-400) 110

Table 16: Valuation Study Results on Wait Times for Application

for Adjustment of Status (Form I-485) 111

Table 17: Valuation Study Results on Wait Times for Application to

Replace Permanent Resident Card (Form I-90) 111

Table 18: Valuation Study Results on Wait Times for Petition for

Alien Relative (Form I-130) 112

Table 19: Valuation Study Results on Wait Time for Application to

Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status (Form I-539) 112

Figures

Figure 1: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Naturalization

Applications (Form N-400) 18

Figure 2: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Applications for

Adjustment of Status (Form I-485) 20

Figure 3: Backlog of Applications Associated With Adjustment of

Status Applications (Form I-485) 21

Figure 4: Backlog of Applications for Employment Authorization

(Form I-765) and Travel Document (Form I-131) 22

Figure 5: INS’ Estimates of Processing Time Based on the Last 3

Months of Fiscal Years 1996-2000 25

Figure 6: Application for Naturalization (Form N-400) Flowchart 54

Figure 7: District Application for Adjustment of Status (Form-485)

Flowchart for Family-Based Applications 56

Figure 8: Service Center Application for Adjustment of Status

(Form I-485) Flowchart for Employment-Based

Applications 58

Figure 9: Application for Naturalization (Form N-400) Workload

Compared to Completions 60
Page iii GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 10: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Applications for

Naturalization (Form N-400) 61

Figure 11: Application for Adjustment of Status (Form I-485)

Workload Compared to Completions 62

Figure 12: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Adjustment of

Status Applications (Form I-485) 63

Figure 13: Application to Replace Permanent Residence Card

(Form I-90) Workload Compared to Completions 64

Figure 14: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Applications to

Replace Permanent Residence Card (Form I-90) 65

Figure 15: Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker (Form I-129)

Workload Compared to Completions 66

Figure 16: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Petitions for

Nonimmigrant Worker (Form I-129) 67

Figure 17: Petition for Alien Relative (Form I-130) Workload

Compared to Completions 68

Figure 18: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Petitions for Alien

Relative (Form I-130) 69

Figure 19: Application for Travel Document (Form I-131) Workload

Compared to Completions 70

Figure 20: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Applications for

Travel Document (Form I-131) 71

Figure 21: Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Form I-140)

Workload Compared to Completions 72

Figure 22: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Immigrant Petitions

for Alien Worker (Form I-140) 73

Figure 23: Petition to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status (Form

I-539) Workload Compared to Completions 74

Figure 24: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Petitions to

Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status (Form I-539) 75

Figure 25: Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence (Form I751) Workload Compared to Completions 76

Figure 26: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Petitions to

Remove Conditions on Residence (Form I-751) 77

Figure 27: Application for Employment Authorization (Form I-765)

Workload Compared to Completions 78

Figure 28: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Applications for

Employment Authorization (Form I-765) 79
Page iv GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Abbreviations

ASC Application Support Center

BETS Buffalo Exams and Tracking System

CLAIMS Computer Linked Application Information Management 

System

FBI Federal Bureau of Investigation

IEFA Immigration Examinations Fee Account

INS Immigration and Naturalization Service

IRCA Immigration Reform and Control Act

ISD Immigration Services Division

LIFE Legal Immigration and Family Equity Act

NCSC National Customer Service Center

RNACS Reengineered Naturalization Applications Casework

System
Page 1 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

May 4, 2001

The Honorable James F. Sensenbrenner, Jr.

Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary

House of Representatives

The Honorable George W. Gekas

Chairman, Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims

Committee on the Judiciary

House of Representatives

The Honorable Jim Turner

House of Representatives

The Honorable Judy Biggert

House of Representatives

INS has been criticized by Congress, the media, and immigrant advocacy

groups for its inability to provide immigrants with timely decisions on

their applications for such benefits as naturalization and legal permanent

residence. In 1996, the integrity of INS’ naturalization process came under

fire because in an effort to reduce a backlog in applications, INS was

naturalizing aliens without first completing criminal history background

checks. In response, INS implemented quality improvement measures in

1997 and 1998 to enhance and monitor the quality of its naturalization

process. These efforts, however, contributed to further backlogs that

reached a high of 1.8 million naturalization applications1

 by the end of

fiscal year 1998. INS continues to struggle with large application backlogs

and lengthy processing times. In some locations, applicants must wait 2

years or longer for INS to adjudicate applications for benefits.

You asked us to review INS’ application workload, quantify the resources

expended adjudicating applications, determine the factors affecting INS’

ability to process applications, and identify INS actions to improve

processing. This report addresses the following questions:

 1

INS receives both applications and petitions from immigrants and U.S. citizens.

Immigrants submit applications to INS when they seek benefits for themselves, such as

U.S. citizenship. Petitions are filed on behalf of aliens, such as when employers petition on

behalf of employees or parents petition on behalf of children. For purposes of this report,

the term “application” is used to refer both to applications and petitions.

United States General Accounting Office

Washington, DC 20548
Page 2 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

1. Since 1994, to what extent have INS’ adjudications budget, staffing,

and workload changed?

2. Since 1994, to what extent has INS experienced backlogs in processing

applications for immigration benefits?

3. How long does it take INS to process applications from the time the

application is received until it is completed?

4. What factors affect INS’ application backlogs and processing times,

and what actions has INS taken or planned to address them?

5. What other actions has INS taken or planned to improve application

processing?

Although INS has experienced substantial growth in its budget and staff, it

continues to have difficulty managing its application workload. INS’

Adjudications and Naturalization program budget, comprised largely of

fees paid by applicants, has nearly quadrupled since fiscal year 1994 to

nearly $500 million. The size of its program staff has more than doubled

since fiscal year 1995 to about 6,100. In fiscal year 2000, INS received

nearly 50 percent more applications than in fiscal year 1994, while its

application backlog increased nearly four-fold to about 3.9 million during

the same time period. INS’ efforts to meet production goals for processing

naturalization and adjustment of status applications helped reduce

backlogs in those areas, but backlogs for other application types then

increased.

INS does not know how long it takes to process aliens’ applications

because its available servicewide automated systems contain unreliable

data and its districts do not have automated systems for tracking many

types of applications. A recent physical inventory of pending applications

revealed that about 767,000 out of almost 3 million applicants with

applications pending as of September 30, 2000, had been waiting at least

21 months for INS to process their naturalization, legal permanent

residence, and other immigration-related applications. To minimize wait

times for employment benefits, INS has implemented a policy that

provides permission to work to aliens who are awaiting a decision on their

application for adjustment of status to legal permanent residence.

However, thousands of applicants who were granted employment

authorization by INS are denied adjustment of status each year, meaning

that they also cannot work in the United States and that their work

Results in Brief
Page 3 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

authorization needs to be revoked. For other application types, the

uncertainty caused by lengthy processing times has reportedly disrupted

many applicants’ lives.

INS officials identified three factors as impeding INS’ ability to reduce

backlogs, improve processing times, and effectively manage its workload:

• Automation: INS districts lack an automated case management and

tracking system for application types other than naturalization. As a result,

INS cannot readily determine (1) the size and status of its pending

workload; (2) application processing times; (3) the existence of processing

bottlenecks; (4) how to deploy staff based on workload and backlogs; or

(5) whether applications are processed in the order in which they are

received.

• Staffing: INS officials say they need additional staff to keep up with a

growing workload. However, they could not specify the types of staff

needed or where they should be located because they lack a staff resource

allocation model.

• Fingerprinting: Due to lengthy processing times, INS frequently does not

adjudicate cases within the 15-month period that the results of the Federal

Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) fingerprint checks for criminal history are

valid. As a result, INS must incur the additional time and expense of

refingerprinting the individuals and sending the fingerprints to the FBI to

perform another criminal history check.

INS has taken or planned to take a number of actions to improve

application processing. It created the Office of Production Management in

1998, which has established monthly production goals and accountability

for field offices. INS hopes to implement a single servicewide automated

case management and tracking system, and it is preparing a business plan

and an information technology strategy to guide immigration benefits

reengineering and information technology improvements over the next 5

to 10 years. In response to our prior recommendations, INS is developing a

blueprint for all its automated system needs, and it is developing an

information technology investment management process. We believe these

efforts are steps in the right direction. Many of them, however, are still in

planning stages, so it is too early to tell whether and to what extent they

will resolve INS’ application workload problems.

At the end of this letter, we make recommendations to INS regarding

calculating actual application processing times; developing guidance and

training for screening adjustment of status applications before issuing

temporary work authorization benefits, and monitoring the quality of this
Page 4 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

screening; developing a staffing model for processing applications; and

improving its fingerprinting procedures. The Department of Justice was

provided a draft of this report for comment and concurred with our

recommendations.

INS, through its Adjudications and Naturalization program, delivers

various immigration benefits and services to aliens, including naturalizing

immigrants, adjusting the status of immigrants to permanent residence,

providing employment authorization, and granting asylum. INS charges

aliens fees for processing their applications and deposits the fees into the

Immigration Examinations Fee Account (IEFA). This account was

established in 1988 to reimburse any INS appropriation for expenses

incurred in providing adjudications and naturalization services. In 1990,

Congress authorized INS to set adjudications and naturalization fees at a

level that would ensure recovery of the full costs of providing services.2

From fiscal year 1994 to fiscal year 1996, the Adjudications and

Naturalization budget was almost entirely funded by IEFA. Beginning in

fiscal year 1997 and continuing through fiscal year 2000, Adjudications and

Naturalization program funding included direct appropriations,3

 in

addition to IEFA funds, to reduce application caseloads.

INS carries out its service function through a network of field offices

consisting of 4 service centers, 33 districts, and 75 application support

centers (ASCs). (App. I contains a list of applications and petitions

processed by the service centers, districts, and ASCs; and app. II contains

 2

IEFA was established by the 1989 Department of Justice Appropriation Act (P.L. 100-459

(1988)), 8 U.S.C. 1356 (m), (n). The requirement to recover the full costs of providing

services was included in the 1991 Department of Justice Appropriation Act (P.L. 101-515

(1990)). IEFA funds, which account for approximately 18 percent of INS’ budget, are

disbursed to many programs within INS, including Inspections, Investigations, Intelligence,

Construction and Engineering, Information and Records Management, and Data and

Communications.

3

For the most part, application fees deposited into IEFA cover application processing

activities. In some years, direct appropriations from the INS Salaries and Expenses account

are also provided for application processing. The conference reports for each fiscal year

accompanying the annual Justice appropriations laws establish the spending level authority

for the activities funded by IEFA. If INS anticipates a need for a change in funding authority

as a result of high or lower-than-expected fee collections, then INS is to prepare a

reprogramming proposal for transmittal by Justice to the Office of Management and Budget

and, subsequently, to the congressional appropriations committees with jurisdiction over

Justice.

Background
Page 5 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

a description of the major applications submitted to INS based on number

received or those of special interest that are cited in the report.)

• INS’ four service centers are located in California, Nebraska, Texas, and

Vermont. They were created in 1990 to help reduce application backlogs in

the district offices. Service centers process 35 types of applications,

including petitions for permanent and temporary workers, petitions for

admission of spouses, and applications for employment-based adjustment

of status to permanent residence. Since February 1996, the service centers

have shared responsibility with the districts for processing naturalization

applications. Naturalization applications are received by the service

centers and processed up to the point of interview, at which time

responsibility for processing the case is shifted to the cognizant district so

that the applicant can be interviewed and the case decided.

• INS’ 33 districts, consisting of a district office and in many cases

suboffices, are located throughout the nation. The districts process 42

types of applications, most of which require interviews with the applicant

or verification of an applicant’s identity. In addition to naturalization

applications, districts process petitions for alien relatives and family-based

adjustment of status applications, among others.

• INS’ 75 application support centers are under the jurisdiction of districts

and are located throughout the nation. They were established in fiscal year

1998 to serve as INS’ designated fingerprint locations.4 In June 2000, INS

shifted responsibility for processing applications for renewal of permanent

resident cards (i.e., green cards) from the districts to ASCs.5

INS’ application processing procedures vary by application type and by

office. In general, the following tasks are involved in processing an

application: (1) collect and deposit the application fee and issue a receipt

to the alien; (2) create an alien file, or request an existing alien file; (3)

enter data on the applicant into an automated system (if available); (4)

take applicant’s fingerprints and send them to the FBI for a criminal

history check (if needed); (5) review the application, and other supporting

documents, such as FBI fingerprint check results, marriage certificate, or

 4

 To accommodate the minority of cases in which applicants would have to travel more

than 100 miles to an ASC, INS also established fingerprint operations in 52 district offices

and suboffices, developed agreements with approximately 40 law enforcement agencies,

and established 44 mobile routes with 82 service points.

5

In 1989, INS set a 10-year limit on the validity of alien permanent resident cards. They

began to expire in fiscal year 2000.
Page 6 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

court disposition of an arrest; (6) interview the applicant (if needed); (7)

administer naturalization test (if needed); (8) approve or deny the case; (9)

notify applicant of INS’ decision; and (10) update INS’ automated systems

(if available). (App. III contains flowcharts depicting INS’ process for

adjudicating naturalization and adjustment of status applications.)

While INS processes about 50 different types of immigration applications,

two types—naturalization and adjustment of status applications accounted

for more than 46 percent of INS’ application backlog in fiscal year 2000.

The number of these applications increased dramatically during the 1990s

due, in part, to two pieces of legislation. First, under the Immigration

Reform and Control Act (IRCA) of 1986, INS created a program to legalize

the status of certain illegal aliens who had resided in the United States

continuously since January 1, 1982.6

 As a result, nearly 3 million illegal

immigrants became legal permanent residents,7

 and by February 1995, they

were eligible to apply for citizenship. Second, under Section 245(i) of the

Immigration and Nationality Act, certain illegal aliens residing in the

United States (e.g., non-immigrants with expired visas) were allowed to

adjust their status to legal permanent residence without returning

overseas.8

 This provision, which was enacted in 1994, resulted in a surge of

adjustment of status applications during fiscal years 1995 through 1997.9

(Statistics on the number of applications received by INS in each of fiscal

years 1994 through 2000 are provided in table 3 on p. 13.)

To address the surge in naturalization applications, in August 1995 INS

launched the Citizenship USA (CUSA) initiative. INS had projected that

without a serious effort to reduce the backlog of naturalization

applications, by the summer of 1996 an eligible applicant would have to

wait 3 years to be naturalized as a U.S. citizen. The stated goal of CUSA

 6

P.L. 99-603, 8 USC 1324a et seq.

7

These illegal immigrants were first “legalized” and granted temporary legal residence

status. After 18-30 months as temporary legal residents, they were able to apply for

permanent legal residence.

8

1995 Department of Justice Appropriation Act (P. L. 103-317 (1994)).

9

The 1994 provision was amended by the 1998 Department of Justice Appropriation Act

(P.L. 105-119 (1997)), to provide that only aliens who were beneficiaries of an immigration

petition or labor certification application on or before Jan. 14, 1998, would be eligible for

adjustment under 245(i). The Legal Immigration and Family Equity Act (P.L. 106-553),

enacted on Dec. 21, 2000, extended the Jan. 14, 1998, date to Apr. 30, 2001.) Section 245(i),

as amended, is codified at 8 U.S.C. 1255i.
Page 7 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

was to reduce the naturalization application backlog to the point where

eligible applicants would be naturalized within 6 months of their

submitting naturalization applications. The CUSA initiative was found to

be fraught with quality and integrity problems that resulted in ineligible

applicants receiving citizenship. According to a recent Department of

Justice report,10 INS made the timely completion of naturalization cases its

guiding principle during its citizenship initiative at the expense of

accuracy and integrity in the determination of eligibility. In response to the

problems that arose, INS implemented naturalization quality procedures in

November 1996, which were designed to achieve consistent and complete

processing through revised fingerprint check procedures, the use of work

sheets and standardized documentation for each file, enhanced

supervisory review, and a standardized quality assurance program.

In 1997, INS established the Office of Naturalization Operations, now

named the Immigration Services Division (ISD). The role of the office is to

help restore integrity and credibility to naturalization processing

procedures, and to reduce naturalization backlogs. The office contracted

with PricewaterhouseCoopers for a plan to reengineer the naturalization

process and, in September 1997, the contractor issued its proposed plan,

which INS is in the process of implementing. Improvements that have been

made include performing a complete file review of cases before applicants

are scheduled for interviews, developing a National Customer Service

Center with a 1-800 phone line for information, and creating and

distributing a “Guide to Naturalization” for use by applicants.

As agreed with your offices, this report addresses the following: (1) Since

1994, to what extent have INS’ adjudications budget, staffing, and

workload changed? (2) Since 1994, to what extent has INS experienced

backlogs in processing aliens’ applications for immigration benefits? (3)

How long does it take INS to process applications from the time the

application is received until it is completed? (4) What factors affect INS’

application backlogs and processing times, and what actions has INS

taken or planned to address them? and (5) What other actions has INS

taken or planned to improve application processing?

 10An Investigation of the Immigration and Naturalization Service’s Citizenship USA

Initiative (Office of Inspector General, U.S. Department of Justice, July 31, 2000).

Objectives, Scope,

and Methodology
Page 8 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

To address our first two reporting questions—the extent to which INS’

budget, staffing, and workload have changed and the extent which INS has

experienced backlogs—we analyzed INS budget and staffing data,

including data on INS’ contracts supporting adjudications activities. We

also analyzed workload data from INS’ Performance Analysis System,

which is INS’ primary system for recording the size of its workload. We

interviewed INS field and headquarters staff regarding the collection and

analysis of the workload data. We also reviewed Inspector General reports

regarding the reliability of INS workload data and held discussions with

Justice Inspector General staff regarding their reports. Questions have

been raised about the reliability of INS’ data on applications received,

completed, and pending. However, INS officials maintain that they are the

only data currently available and are useful for discerning trends in

application workload. We rounded the numbers to the nearest thousand

when presenting workload data in order to reduce the impression that the

data are precise.

To answer question 3, regarding how long it takes INS to process

applications, we reviewed the methods INS has used to estimate and

report processing times. We interviewed field and headquarters staff about

how these data were being collected, monitored, and disseminated. We

reviewed and analyzed INS’ application inventory valuation study, which

estimated the age of INS’ pending workload for selected types of

applications as of September 30, 2000. We also interviewed representatives

of community-based organizations to obtain information about their

experiences with INS and how INS’ processing delays have impacted their

clients. In this review, we focused on the amount of time that elapsed

between INS receiving and completing the processing of an application,

not on the amount of staff time expended by INS to process individual

applications.

To address the last two questions—factors that affect INS’ application

backlogs and processing times and actions that INS has taken or planned

to improve application processing—we interviewed INS officials in

headquarters, as well as in six field offices—the California Service Center

in Laguna Niguel; the Vermont Service Center in St. Albans; and district

offices in Los Angeles, Chicago, Miami, and Houston. We chose these

locations because they were identified as offices handling a large volume

of applications and backlogs. Together, these two service centers and four

districts accounted for 47 percent of all applications received by INS in

fiscal year 2000. We reviewed planning documents, including reports

regarding improvements to INS processes. In this review, we focused on
Page 9 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

application backlogs and processing times and did not conduct analyses of

the integrity of INS’ processing efforts.

We conducted our work from February 2000 through March 2001 in

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. We

requested comments on a draft of this report from the Attorney General.

The INS Executive Associate Commissioner for Field Operations provided

written comments, which are summarized at the end of this letter and

reproduced in appendix VII.

INS’ Adjudications and Naturalization program budget, funded primarily

by fees, has increased significantly since fiscal year 1994. The largest

increase occurred in fiscal year 1996, when INS hired over 900 temporary

officer and support staff to reduce application backlogs. Staffing data for

each of the six field offices that we visited are presented in appendix V.

INS’ Adjudications and Naturalization program budget almost quadrupled

from $129 million in fiscal year 1994 to $496 million in fiscal year 2000. As

shown in table 1, the majority of funding has been from fees INS charged

applicants for processing their applications and deposited into the IEFA.

Beginning in fiscal year 1997, INS’ IEFA funds were supplemented with

direct appropriations. For fiscal years 1997 and 1998, INS received

appropriated funds to support backlog reduction and improve the integrity

of the naturalization process. For fiscal years 1999 and 2000, these

appropriated funds were generally used to reduce application backlogs.11

 11According to INS officials, INS used the appropriated funds to hire officers in temporary

positions; to contract for clerical support in districts, service centers, and application

support centers; to contract for studies to reengineer the application process; to fund staff

overtime; and to expand the National Customer Service Center, among other things.

INS’ Adjudications

and Naturalization

Program Budget and

Staffing Have

Substantially

Increased
Page 10 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Table 1: Funding Sources for INS’ Adjudications and Naturalization Program

Dollars in thousands

Fiscal year

Funding source 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

2000

enacted

2001

appropriated

IEFA funds $126,313 $168,523 $276,272 $302,663 $360,992 $363,871 $407,605 $457,362

Other fee accountsa2,885 2,652 1,163 1,182 1,031 754 1,125 1,125

Appropriated funds bbb 5,916c 16,687c 75,788c 86,896d 41,621e

Total $129,198 $171,175 $277,435 $309,761 $378,710 $440,413 $495,626 $500,108

a

Includes Legalization, H1-B, and other immigration fee account funds.

b

The Adjudications and Naturalization program did not receive direct appropriations these years.

c

According to an INS official, INS received these funds to reduce application backlogs and improve

the integrity of the naturalization process. These funds were used to fund staff overtime, fund

contracts for clerical staff, and reengineer the naturalization process.

d

The total amount of direct appropriated funding was $176 million in fiscal year 1999 and $124.2

million in fiscal year 2000. According to INS officials, these funds were used to hire temporary officers

to reduce application backlogs, to expand the National Customer Service Center, to conduct a

fingerprint verification project, to fund staff overtime, and to upgrade computer systems, among other

things.

e

According to an INS official, $35 million is being used to fund contracts for clerical support in INS’

service centers, and about $6 million is being used for the maintenance and repair of digital

fingerprinting machines used by ASCs.

Source: GAO analysis of INS data.

Overall, the total number of onboard program staff more than doubled

between fiscal years 1995 and 2000.12 As shown in table 2, the number of

adjudications officers increased 78 percent (from 1,277 to 2,278 officers)

and INS support staff increased by 60 percent (from 1,037 to 1,664 clerks).

The overwhelming majority of the growth in INS staff occurred in fiscal

year 1996. Between fiscal years 1996 and 2000, the number of contractor

support staff for the Adjudications and Naturalization program increased

by 86 percent (from 1,158 to 2,154 clerks).

 12INS officials did not have detailed servicewide staffing data available before fiscal year

1995 because staffing was managed at the field office level. The exact growth in program

staff cannot be determined because INS did not have records on the number of contractor

staff who provided clerical support services prior to fiscal year 1996.
Page 11 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Table 2: Onboard Adjudications Staff

INS adjudications officersbINS support staffc

Contractor

support staff

Fiscal yeara

Permanent TemporarydTotal Permanent Temporarye Total Total

Grand

total

1995 1,273 4 1,277 847 190 1,037 f2,314

1996 1,419 497 1,916 971 736 1,707 1,158 4,781

1997 1,436 442 1,878 981 701 1,682 1,340 4,900

1998 1,692 408 2,100 1,049 633 1,682 1,584 5,366

1999 1,788 522 2,310 1,161 495 1,656 2,110 6,076

2000 1,954 324 2,278 1,124 540 1,664 2,154 6,096

Note: Staff onboard as of the end of each fiscal year.

a

Detailed staffing data were not available for fiscal year 1994.

b

Includes adjudications officers and supervisory adjudications officers.

c

Includes applications clerks, office automation clerks, secretaries, and clerk typists

d

Includes term appointments (up to 4 years) and rehired annuitants.

e

Includes term appointments (up to 4 years), rehired annuitants, and temporary appointments (up to 2

years).

f

INS did not have contractor support staffing data available for fiscal year 1995.

Source: GAO analysis of INS data.

Table 2 also shows the growth in the number of adjudications officers and

INS clerical support staff in both permanent and temporary positions. The

number of officers in permanent positions increased 53 percent (from

1,273 to 1,954 officers) between fiscal years 1995 and 2000. The number of

officers and INS support staff in temporary positions grew primarily in

fiscal year 1996 due to additional funding to process application backlogs.

Of about 6,100 program staff who were onboard in fiscal year 2000, about

half were in temporary or contractor positions.

INS officials told us that by using temporary adjudications staff, INS can

more easily reassign temporary positions from one field office to another

based on application processing needs. In addition to the INS support

staff, INS contracted for clerical support for its service centers beginning

in fiscal year 1996, and for its districts beginning in fiscal year 1998. At the

end of fiscal year 2000, INS had 341 contract clerical support staff in the

districts and 1,813 in service centers. Contract clerical personnel were to

support the processing of naturalization and adjustment of status

applications. Clerical support staff duties included data entry, scheduling

appointments for applicants, file operations, courier services, and

naturalization ceremony support. In fiscal year 2000, INS spent almost $64
Page 12 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

million for contracts to provide clerical services in their service centers

and districts.

Although there were year-to-year variations in INS’ workload—that is, the

number of applications of different types that INS received and

completed—INS’ workload in fiscal year 2000 was generally larger than in

1994. An exception was new naturalization applications, which were fewer

in fiscal year 2000 than in fiscal year 1994. However, INS completed more

naturalization applications in fiscal year 2000 than in 5 of the previous 6

years.

The size and nature of INS’ application workload are not known exactly

because INS’ workload data are not accurate. The Justice Inspector

General has reported that INS’ Adjudications and Naturalization workload

data contain errors, are inadequately monitored, and cannot be audited

because they cannot be traced back to individual applications. INS

officials with whom we spoke acknowledged that INS’ workload data are

not precise, but they maintained that they are useful for understanding

workload trends. Therefore, the workload figures presented in this section

should be used with caution and have been rounded to the nearest

thousand to reflect their lack of precision. (Workload data for each of the

six field offices that we visited are presented in app. V.)

Between fiscal years 1994 to 2000, the total number of applications

received by INS increased by about 50 percent to more than 6 million, as

shown in table 3. Generally, from fiscal years 1994 to 1997, most types of

applications submitted increased steadily. Naturalization applications

peaked at about 1.4 million in fiscal year 1997, then declined substantially

each subsequent year to about 461,000 in fiscal year 2000. The number of

naturalization applications that INS received in fiscal year 2000 was about

15 percent less than in fiscal year 1994 and about 67 percent less than the

high of 1.4 million in fiscal year 1997. Adjustment of status applications

peaked at about 760,000 in fiscal year 1997, declined in fiscal years 1998

and 1999, and again increased in fiscal year 2000. Receipts of most other

types of applications were greater in fiscal year 2000 than in fiscal year

1994.

For example, employment authorization applications (form I-765) doubled

between fiscal year 1994 and 2000, and accounted for nearly one-fourth of

the total number of applications that INS received in fiscal year 2000. As

discussed on page 21 and 22, lengthy adjustment of status processing

INS’ Adjudications

and Naturalization

Workload Has Varied,

But Exact Size and

Nature of Workload

Are Not Known

Annual Number of

Applications Received by

INS Has Varied Over Time
Page 13 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

times can contribute to the number of employment authorization

applications that aliens submit to INS. This can occur because INS

provides employment authorization for 1 year but may take longer than a

year to adjudicate an adjustment of status application, prompting the alien

to submit a new application for employment authorization.

Table 3: Applications INS Received by Application Type

In thousands

Fiscal year

Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400) 543 960 1,277 1,413 933 765 461

Application for adjustment of status (I-485) 317 578 647 760 527 456 562

Application to replace permanent resident card (I-90) 544 461 409 321 336 360 705

Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I-129) 303 273 274 312 383 502 721

Petition for alien relative (I-130) 663 630 709 886 743 466 598

Application for travel document (I-131) 281 283 335 385 453 449 522

Immigrant petition for alien worker (I-140) 47 52 61 69 68 79 96

Application to extend or change nonimmigrant status (I-539) 227 203 213 239 262 380 393

Petition to remove conditions on residence (I-751) 110 118 120 103 131 117 112

Application for employment authorization (I-765) 707 865 953 1,161 1,212 1,357 1,451

All other application types 394 458 450 630 516 467 437

Totala4,138 4,879 5,447 6,277 5,563 5,399 6,059

a

Sum of columns may not equal totals due to rounding.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System.

According to INS officials and community-based organization

representatives with whom we spoke, the increase in naturalization

applications between fiscal years 1994 and 1997 was due, in part, to three

factors. First, approximately 3 million aliens who had been granted

amnesty through the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 were

eligible to apply for naturalization by February 1995. Second, INS

instituted a requirement that by March 1996, permanent resident aliens

had to replace their existing alien registration card with another card with

increased security features. Since the cost difference between the

replacement card and the naturalization application was small, many

aliens may have decided at that time to apply for naturalization. Third, a

number of congressional proposals and a California ballot proposition

making certain governmental health, welfare, and educational benefits

contingent on U.S. citizenship may have provided an incentive to aliens to

apply for naturalization.
Page 14 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Some community-based organization representatives expressed the view

that the decline in the number of new naturalization applications since

fiscal year 1997 may have been due to publicity about the long waiting

periods aliens faced before INS adjudicated their applications. In addition,

INS raised the fee for naturalization applications in January 1999 and for

most other application types in October 1998, and this may have

discouraged potential applicants from applying.

The total number of applications INS completed (approved and denied)

has varied by type, but overall, increased from about 3.9 million in fiscal

year 1994 to nearly 6.5 million in fiscal year 2000.13 (See table 4.) The

number of completed naturalization applications almost tripled from

about 444,000 in fiscal year 1994 to a high of slightly over 1.3 million in

fiscal year 1996, when INS’ efforts to reduce backlogs through its CUSA

initiative were underway. As INS began its quality improvement measures

to address identified weaknesses in CUSA, completions declined to about

713,000 and 611,000 in fiscal years 1997 and 1998, respectively. Then, as it

renewed its efforts to reduce its naturalization backlogs, INS more than

doubled the number of completed applications in fiscal years 1999 and

2000, completing nearly 1.3 million applications in each of those years. INS

completed more naturalization applications in fiscal year 2000 than in 5 of

the previous 6 years.

INS completed greater numbers of adjustment of status applications in

fiscal years 1995 and 1996 relative to 1994 as seen in table 4. For the

following 3 years, however, INS completed increasingly fewer

applications. In fiscal year 1999, INS completed about 300,000 adjustment

of status applications, fewer than in any prior year since fiscal year 1994.

In fiscal year 2000, INS made the processing of these applications a

priority and nearly doubled its completion level, reaching a 7-year high of

more than 560,000 completed applications.

 13INS officials told us that the time it takes to complete applications varies because some

types are more complex than others. For example, an application to replace a permanent

resident card (form I-90) is relatively simple, while an application to adjust to permanent

residence status (form I-485) is more complex.

Annual Number of

Applications Completed by

INS Has Varied Over Time
Page 15 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Table 4: Applications INS Completed by Application Type

In thousands

Fiscal year

Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400) 444 506 1,334 713 611 1,252 1,298

Application for adjustment of status (I-485) 342 358 542 478 416 300 564

Application to replace permanent resident card (I-90) 443 543 487 260 146 259 718

Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I-129) 319 273 300 327 385 527 698

Petition for alien relative (I-130) 619 629 758 764 593 450 383

Application for travel document (I-131) 264 283 331 356 507 398 468

Immigrant petition for alien worker (I-140) 52 55 64 69 54 59 98

Application to extend or change nonimmigrant status (I-539) 249 212 235 234 227 307 383

Petition to remove conditions on residence (I-751) 106 107 123 106 96 99 96

Application for employment authorization (I-765) 680 847 939 1,106 1,228 1,258 1,392

All other application types 393 452 433 541 429 310 388

Totala3,912 4,265 5,547 4,954 4,693 5,219 6,487

a

Sum of columns may not equal totals due to rounding.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System.

INS’ total application backlog (pending applications) increased from about

1 million in fiscal year 1994 to almost 4 million in fiscal years 1998 through

2000. (See table 5.) INS’ naturalization backlog more than doubled during

the same period. Since fiscal year 1998, however, the naturalization

backlog declined by more than half—from about 1.8 million pending

applications in fiscal year 1998 to about 817,000 in fiscal year 2000. As was

the case with INS’ data on applications received and completed, INS’

backlog figures may be more useful for discerning trends than as precise

measures of workload at a given point in time.

As shown in table 5, the backlog of naturalization applications declined in

fiscal year 1999 and again in fiscal year 2000, whereas the backlog of

adjustment of status applications and most other types of applications

continued to increase.

Naturalization

Backlogs Have

Declined While Most

Others Have

Increased
Page 16 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Table 5: Backlog of Pending Applications by Application Type

In thousands

Fiscal year

Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400) 314 705 684 1,440 1,803 1,356 817

Application for adjustment of status (I-485) 121 321 435 699 809 951 1,001

Application to replace permanent resident card (I-90) 200 174 44 48 168 170 239

Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I-129) 12 21 16 24 49 43 77

Petition for alien relative (I-130) 182 231 242 407 554 593 797

Application for travel document (I-131) 28 28 34 78 42 73 102

Immigrant petition for alien worker (I-140) 7 6 7 8 20 43 48

Application to extend or change nonimmigrant status (I-539) 17 31 17 32 75 176 178

Petition to remove conditions on residence (I-751) 23 28 27 35 68 76 99

Application for employment authorization (I-765) 44 70 77 135 115 186 256

All other application types 40 52 69 144 189 305 276

Totala987 1,668 1,652 3,051 3,891 3,973 3,892

Note: Number of applications pending at the end of each fiscal year. According to an INS official, the

total number of pending applications is the sum of applications received (see table 3), plus

applications reopened, plus adjustments made as a result of audits, minus applications completed for

the fiscal year (see table 4).

a

Sum of columns may not equal totals due to rounding.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System.

As a short-term solution to reduce its application backlogs, INS allocated

additional staff resources to process naturalization applications by

reassigning staff and using overtime. INS also set an annual production

goal for completing cases for the first time in fiscal year 1999. As shown in

table 6, INS’ fiscal year 1999 and 2000 goals, respectively, were 1.2 and 1.3

million completed naturalization applications. INS met its goal in both

years. As shown in table 5, the number of pending naturalization

applications decreased from a high of about 1.8 million at the end of fiscal

year 1998 to about 817,000 at the end of fiscal year 2000. INS officials told

us that they are also planning to reengineer their processes to achieve

long-term solutions to managing their workload. These efforts are

discussed on p. 47.
Page 17 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Table 6: INS’ Production Goals for Naturalization Applications (Form N-400)

In thousands

Fiscal year Production goal Applications completed Result

1999 1,200 1,252 Met goal

2000 1,300 1,298 Met goal

2001a 800

a

According to INS officials, the possibility of INS achieving its fiscal year 2001 production goal was

contingent upon an assessment of the impact of the Legal Immigration and Family Equity Act (LIFE),

enacted on Dec. 21, 2000, on INS’ workload. The LIFE Act extends the eligibility date from Jan.14,

1998, to April 30, 2001, for applicants to apply for adjustment of status to legal permanent residence

without returning overseas. INS may revise this goal–originally proposed in October 2000–later in

fiscal year 2001.

Source: INS Office of Production Management.

The number of adjudications officer workyears spent processing

naturalization applications has increased in most years since fiscal year

1994.14 In order to meet the production goals it set for itself in fiscal years

1999 and 2000, INS devoted about 660 and 618 adjudications officer

workyears, respectively, to processing naturalization applications.15 Figure

1 shows the officer workyears spent processing naturalization applications

during each of fiscal years 1994 though 2000.

 14There is not always a direct relationship between the number of INS officer workyears

spent processing naturalization applications and the number of completed applications

(see table 4) on a year to year basis. An INS official told us that the number of officer hours

could increase, while the number of completions could decrease, due to changes in

naturalization application processes (e.g., naturalization quality procedures, fingerprinting

procedures) and training newly hired staff.

15INS does not maintain data on the number of officers or clerical staff assigned to process

various types of applications. In order to make an approximation of the amount of staff

devoted to processing naturalization applications, we analyzed hours recorded by officers

in INS’ Performance Analysis System. Clerical hours could not be analyzed because

contractor clerical hours are not recorded by type of application processed.
Page 18 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 1: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Naturalization Applications

(Form N-400)

Note: Data include adjudications officers’ overtime but not the time they spent on administrative

activities (e.g., training or leave). According to INS officials, data do not always include the time INS

officers, such as inspectors, were detailed to the Adjudications and Naturalization program because

INS did not consistently collect these data.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.

During the 2 years that INS was concentrating on meeting naturalization

production goals, the backlog of adjustment of status applications

increased from about 809,000 at the end of fiscal year 1998 to slightly over

1 million in fiscal year 2000. Although INS also experienced increases in

adjustment of status application backlogs in fiscal years 1995 through

1997, these increases were attributed to other factors. INS officials cited

changes to section 245(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (see p. 6

for further discussion) as a major reason for the adjustment of status

application backlog in the years before INS’ naturalization initiatives. INS

set production goals for adjustment of status applications beginning in

fiscal year 1999. As shown in table 7, INS’ goal was 361,000 in fiscal year

1999 and 500,000 in fiscal year 2000. INS fell short of the fiscal year 1999

goal by about 60,000 applications because, according to INS officials, it

618

660

466

434

400

172 155

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of officer workyears

Fiscal year
Page 19 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

was still giving priority to completing naturalization applications. INS did

meet its fiscal year 2000 production goal.

Table 7: INS Production Goals for Applications for Adjustment of Status

(Form I-485)

In thousands

Fiscal year

Production

goal

Applications

completed Result

1999 361 300 Did not meet goal

2000 500 564 Met goal

2001a800

a

According to INS officials, the possibility of INS achieving its fiscal year 2001 production goal was

contingent upon an assessment of the impact of the Legal Immigration and Family Equity Act (passed

on Dec. 21, 2000) on INS’ workload. The LIFE Act extends the eligibility date from Jan. 14, 1998, to

April 30, 2001, for applicants to apply for adjustment of status to legal permanent residence without

returning overseas. INS may revise this goal–originally proposed in October 2000–later in fiscal year

2001.

Source: INS Office of Production Management.

As shown in figure 2, the number of workyears INS adjudications officers

spent processing adjustment of status applications varied between fiscal

years 1994 and 2000.16 In fiscal year 2000, INS devoted 240 officer

workyears to processing these applications, more than twice the 116

workyears spent in fiscal year 1994. Adjudications officer time spent

processing adjustment of status applications peaked at 280 workyears in

fiscal year 1997. INS increased its officer workyears by 22 percent in fiscal

year 2000—from 197 workyears in fiscal year 1999 to 240 workyears in

fiscal year 2000.

 16There is not always a direct relationship between the number of INS officer workyears

spent processing adjustment of status applications and the number of completed

applications (see table 4) on a year to year basis. An INS official told us that the number of

officer hours could increase, while the number of completions could decrease, due to

changes in adjustment of status application processes (e.g., new application requirements

and fingerprinting procedures).
Page 20 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 2: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Applications for Adjustment of

Status (Form I-485)

Note: Data include adjudications officers’ overtime but not the time they spent on administrative

activities (e.g., training or leave). According to INS officials, data do not always include the time INS

officers, such as inspectors, were detailed to the Adjudications and Naturalization program because

INS did not consistently collect these data.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.

The growth in the backlog of adjustment of status applications was

associated with a growth in the backlog of some other application types.

For adjustment of status applications based on employment, an employer

must file a petition for an alien worker (form I-140) before the alien files

an adjustment of status application. In addition, a relative may file a

petition for alien relative (form I-130) at the same time that the alien

applies for adjustment of status (form I-485).17 INS officials expect that as

INS reduces the backlog of adjustment of status applications, these related

 17To apply for adjustment of status to permanent residence, an alien must have a relative

petition for them. If the alien is already physically present in the United States, then the

petition by a relative is filed with INS. If the alien is overseas, then the petition is filed with

the U.S. consulate.

116

128

197

280

253

197

240

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of officer workyears

Fiscal year
Page 21 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

application backlogs should also decrease. Figure 3 shows how the

backlogs of these three types of associated applications have changed for

fiscal years 1994 through 2000.

Figure 3: Backlog of Applications Associated With Adjustment of Status

Applications (Form I-485)

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.

An alien may also submit an application for an employment authorization

document (form I-765) if the alien wants to work while the adjustment of

status to permanent residence application (form I-485) is pending, or for a

travel document (form I-131) if the alien wants to travel outside the U.S.

while the application is pending. Backlogs for these types of applications

have also increased. INS officials told us that the length of time aliens have

to wait for INS to make a decision on their adjustment of status

applications has a direct impact on the number of applications that they

submit for employment authorization documents and travel documents.

0

10

20

30

40

50

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

100

300

500

700

900

1,100

Fiscal year

Number of applications (in thousands)

I-485 application for adjustment of status

I-130 petition for alien relative

I-140 immigrant petition for alien worker
Page 22 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

This is because employment and travel documents are valid for limited

periods of time. For example, if INS takes more than 24 months to

complete an adjustment of status application, an alien may have to apply

for employment authorization 3 times during the waiting period, since the

employment authorization is only valid for a period of 1 year.

Figure 4: Backlog of Applications for Employment Authorization (Form I-765) and

Travel Document (Form I-131)

Source: GAO analysis of INS’ Performance Analysis System data.

While INS worked on the backlogs for naturalization and adjustment of

status applications, backlogs for other application types increased. For

example, the backlog for application to extend/change nonimmigrant

status (form I-539) increased 10-fold from 17,000 pending applications in

fiscal year 1994 to over 178,000 in fiscal year 2000. INS officials told us that

many aliens are left in the difficult situation of not hearing from INS

regarding their applications to extend their stays at the time they are

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of applications (in thousands)

Fiscal year

I-765 application for employment authorization document

I-131 application for travel document
Page 23 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

required to leave the U.S.18(For statistical data on several types of

applications, see app. IV.)

For fiscal year 2001, INS established two additional production goals for

applications related to naturalization. INS set production goals of 66,000

for the application for certification of citizenship (form N-600) and 24,000

for the replacement of naturalization/citizenship document (form N-565).

INS officials stated that they set these goals as part of their overall

management approach in setting more comprehensive production

management goals. At the end of fiscal year 2000, the N-600 applications

had a backlog of 85,000 and the N-565 had a backlog of 29,000.

INS does not know how much time elapses between receiving applications

and the completion of application processing because it does not

systematically record and analyze such data. In lieu of actual processing

time, INS uses a method to estimate processing time, but the usefulness

and reliability of the estimates are limited. INS field offices also estimate

the age of applications that are currently being processed as another

indicator of application processing time, but this can provide misleading

information. A recent INS study revealed that large numbers of

naturalization and other types of applications were still pending more than

21 months after INS received them.

INS has implemented a policy of minimizing adjustment of status

applicants’ wait times for employment benefits. However, each year

thousands of applicants are denied adjustment of status requiring that

their employment authorization be revoked. Because of the lengthy

processing times for other application types, applicants’ lives have been

disrupted while waiting for INS to complete processing their applications.

Information on actual processing times is not available because, according

to INS’ Immigration Services Division director,19 the agency’s automated

application data are incomplete and unreliable. The ISD director told us

 18INS officials told us that an alien must file his application to extend his nonimmigrant

status when he is still in a legal status, and generally, the alien would not have to depart

until they heard from INS regarding the decision on the form I-539.

19In this report, we refer to INS’ Deputy Executive Associate Commissioner of the

Immigration Services Division as the ISD director.

Actual Processing

Times Are Not

Known, but Age of

Pending Workload

Indicates Lengthy

Wait Times for

Applicants

Actual Processing Times

Not Known
Page 24 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

that although INS’ automated systems contain data that could be used to

calculate actual processing times, INS has chosen not to do so because

these data are incomplete and unreliable. In addition, INS’ districts lack an

automated case management and tracking system for most applications

other than naturalization, making it impossible to measure processing

times in the districts.20 The ISD director told us that INS is beginning to

examine how to develop a reporting capability for CLAIMS 3 and that this

reporting capability would include calculating actual processing times for

adjustment of status and other applications processed by the service

centers. In addition, he told us that INS is considering how to use CLAIMS

4 to calculate actual processing times now that it is almost fully deployed

to all service centers and districts.

In the absence of information on actual processing times, INS has been

estimating processing time by computing the ratio of pending to

completed applications. INS uses the estimates to project future

processing time for incoming applications and to assess its annual

performance. However, fluctuations in INS’ workload and problems with

the reliability of its data limit the usefulness of its processing time

estimates.

INS has been providing Congress with monthly reports on processing

times for naturalization and adjustment of status applications since 1995.

Figure 5 shows INS’ estimates of application processing times for fiscal

years 1996 through 2000. INS calculated these numbers by dividing the

number of applications pending on the last day of the fiscal year by the

average monthly number of applications completed during the last 3

months of the fiscal year. Processing time estimates for each of the six

field offices that we visited are presented in appendix V.

 20The problems with INS’ automated case management and tracking systems, the lack of

automated systems in the districts, and INS’ efforts to improve its automated systems are

discussed in detail in the automation section beginning on p. 33.

INS Estimates Processing

Time, but Usefulness Is

Limited
Page 25 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 5: INS’ Estimates of Processing Time Based on the Last 3 Months of Fiscal

Years 1996-2000

Note: INS established processing time performance goals for applications for naturalization (N-400) in

fiscal years 1999 and 2000, and for adjustment of status (I-485) in fiscal year 2000.

Source: GAO analysis of INS data.

For assessing annual performance, INS uses its end-of-fiscal year

estimates of processing time. For example, based on the number of

applications that were pending and completed at the end of fiscal year

2000, INS estimated that as of September 30, 2000, it was taking 6 months

to process naturalization applications and 17 months to process

adjustment of status applications. Since INS had set processing time goals

of 6 months and 24 months, respectively, for processing naturalization and

adjustment of status applications during fiscal year 2000, INS determined

that it had met or exceeded its goals for the year.

4

6

12

26

31

47

17

25

18

8

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Processing time in months

Fiscal year

Annual performance goals set

for processing N-400s and I-485s 

N-400 application for naturalization

I-485 application for adjustment of status
Page 26 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

The usefulness of INS’ estimates is limited by two major factors. First, the

estimates of projected processing time fluctuate in relation to the number

of applications INS receives and completes, which in turn is a function of

both available resources and productivity during that time. If any of these

variables change, then INS’ prior performance will not accurately predict

its future performance. For example, at the end of September 2000, INS

was estimating that its processing time for naturalization applications was

6 months. By the end of December 2000, however, the estimated

processing time had increased to 13 months. According to an INS official,

this occurred because at the end of fiscal year 2000, INS was dedicating its

resources to meeting its production goal of completing 1.3 million

naturalization applications, and once the goals were met, INS redirected

some resources to processing other types of applications.

Second, the usefulness of INS’ processing time estimate is limited by the

lack of reliable data on the number of pending applications. As evidence of

the reliability problems with its data on pending workload, INS had to

revise its projected time for processing naturalization applications as of

the end of fiscal year 1999. INS’ inventory of pending naturalization

applications as of September 30, 1999, revealed that the actual number of

pending naturalization cases was about 160,000 higher than the number

reflected in INS’ workload data, according to the ISD director. As a result,

INS recalculated the projected processing time to be 12 months as of

September 30, 1999. The original figure had been 9 months.

According to the ISD director, INS recognizes that its method for

projecting processing times does not provide an accurate picture of how

long applicants must wait for INS to process applications, and he would

prefer to report actual processing times. He reiterated that INS is starting

to look into using CLAIMS 3 and CLAIMS 4 to calculate actual processing

times.

To reduce the number of customer inquiries and improve service, INS field

offices use another indicator to provide information to the public about

how long they can expect to wait for their applications to be adjudicated.

Specifically, service centers inform applicants of the initial receipt date of

cases that are being reviewed for the first time, while the districts inform

applicants of the age of the cases that are being interviewed for the first

time. This information is conveyed to applicants who visit an INS field

office, or inquire about their case by telephoning the National Customer

Processing Time Indicators

Have Limitations
Page 27 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Service Center (NCSC).21 In general, the information disseminated by the

field offices and NCSC is understated because cases that are continued for

additional evidence (e.g., because supporting documents are missing) tend

to take longer than cases that are approved or denied when being

reviewed for the first time, and continued cases are not considered when

the offices calculate the age of their pending cases. In addition, the field

office’s determination of the age of its pending cases is not based on a

statistical sample. Therefore, it can only be used as a guide for INS staff to

manage case inquiries.

Officials from the community-based organizations that we contacted

consistently stated that information provided by INS field offices was

often incorrect and misleading. For instance, according to one official,

officers in an INS district had told applicants that, based on the age of

their pending cases, the applicants would receive their alien registration

card in about 90 days in one case and 6 months in another. After 6 months

had passed, the applicants had not received an alien registration card and

returned to the district office, only to be told that it would take another 3

months to process their applications due to backlogs. (App. V contains

information on the age of the cases that the six field offices we visited

reported having processed as of September 2000.)

As part of its servicewide physical inventory of pending applications, INS

conducted a valuation study to determine the dollar value of fees

associated with pending applications that would be reported as deferred

revenue in INS’ financial statements.22 Depending on the date the

application was filed, INS assigned a dollar value to these applications

based on whether the applications were filed before or after the most

recent fee change. This study, therefore, also provides useful information

on the age of INS’ pending applications, and how long applicants had been

waiting for INS to process their applications. The study found that for five

types of applications that were pending as of September 30, 2000, an

 21Applicants can call NCSC’s 1-800 phone line to obtain general processing time

information on particular types of applications. In certain cases, NCSC staff will refer the

case to the responsible district for follow-up and response.

22Deferred revenue represents the fees submitted by applicants for benefits where the

applications had not been fully processed by INS. The sample population consisted of

pending applications of five types in 35 INS field offices that comprised approximately 95

percent of the servicewide pending applications according to a July 14, 2000, inventory.

The study was designed to enable INS to estimate—within a 5-percent margin of error—the

number of pending applications that had been submitted under the former fee structure.

Recent INS Study Revealed

Long Wait Times for Many

Applicants
Page 28 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

estimated 767,000 applications had been filed at least 21 months

previously. That is, of the approximately 3 million applications pending

among the five types of applications studied, over one-fourth of the

applicants had waited at least 21 month for INS to decide their cases.

Among naturalization applicants whose applications were pending, the

study found that 41 percent, or about 335,000 applicants, had been waiting

at least 21 months for INS to decide their case. In the Los Angeles and New

York districts, 59 percent and 92 percent of naturalization applicants,

respectively, had been waiting at least 21 months for an INS decision. At

the four service centers, the percentage waiting at least 21 months ranged

between 9 percent and 30 percent. Among adjustment of status applicants,

about one-fourth, or slightly over 250,000 applicants, had been waiting at

least 24 months for an INS decision. In the Los Angeles and New York

districts, 39 percent and 48 percent of adjustment of status applicants,

respectively, had been waiting at least 24 months for an INS decision. At

INS’ four service centers, the percentage waiting at least 24 months

ranged between 2 percent and 28 percent. Since the cases in the valuation

study were still pending as of September 2000, the total wait time for

applicants will be even longer than revealed by the study. Table 8 provides

the results of the valuation study for the five types of applications

sampled. (App. VI provides the valuation study results for each service

center, district, and region included in INS’ study.)
Page 29 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Table 8: Valuation Study Results on Wait Times Associated With Pending Applications as of September 30, 2000

Type of Application

Total number

pendinga

Number

sampled

Percentage

submitted

before fee

changeb

Number

submitted

before fee

change

Minimum

wait timec

Application for naturalization (N-400) 817,728 7,634 41 335,268 21 months

Application for adjustment of status (I-485) 1,000,669 9,670 25 250,167 24 months

Application to replace permanent resident

card (I-90)

238,299 1,527 4 9,532 24 months

Petition for alien relative (I-130) 789,292 6,310 18 142,073 24 months

Application to extend/change nonimmigrant

status (I-539)

102,332 944 1 1,023 24 months

Total 2,948,320 26,085 26 766,563 21 months

a

These are the final numbers of pending applications as of September 30, 2000, as counted during

INS’ servicewide inventory conducted in October 2000. They differ from the backlog numbers in table

5 because the data in table 5 reflect the inventory count data adjusted by the INS field offices to allow

for differences in the ways cases were counted for inventory and workload reporting purposes. For

example, the inventory results were adjusted because they did not include any applications or

petitions reopened on motion or appeal. For inventory purposes, these cases were not counted, but

they are counted for workload purposes. For the I-539, the difference was about 76,000 due in part to

the fact that each I-539 was counted as one in the inventory. For workload purposes, multiple

beneficiaries listed on one I-539 form are counted as separate cases.

b

The fee change for the application for naturalization took effect on January 15, 1999, while all the

other application fee changes became effective on October 13, 1998.

c

The figures in this column represent the time that elapsed between the effective date of the new fees

and September 30, 2000. We refer to it as a minimum wait time because the only information on the

age of these applications is that they were filed before the effective date of the fee change and were

still pending on September 30, 2000.

Source: GAO analysis of INS data.

INS issues employment authorization documents to applicants before it

adjudicates their applications for adjustment of status. INS does this in

accordance with an INS policy that, according to the ISD director, is

intended to prevent aliens from having to wait for INS to adjudicate their

adjustment of status applications before they can work. INS’ goal is to

provide employment authorization to adjustment of status applicants as

quickly as possible and no later than 90 days after receipt of the

employment application.23 Prior to issuing the employment authorization

 23INS generally complies with its own requirement to issue an employment authorization

document within 90 days of receiving an adjustment of status application. This requirement

is included in 8 C.F.R. 274 a.13. If INS fails to issue an employment authorization card

within 90 days, the applicant is entitled to be issued an interim authorization valid for up to

240 days to be used until INS issues the employment authorization document (8 C.F.R. 274

a.13).

INS Grants Work

Authorization to Many

Adjustment of Status

Applicants Whose Work

Authorization Is Later

Revoked
Page 30 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

document, INS is to screen the adjustment of status application for basic

eligibility. If INS accepts the adjustment of status application, the

applicant is granted employment authorization for one year. INS’ initial

decision on whether to grant employment authorization to adjustment of

status applicants is based on a brief screening of the application to

determine if the applicant meets basic eligibility requirements. According

to field office officials, this screening consists of an application clerk

checking the application to ensure that it is complete, that an underlying

petition based on a family or business relationship is pending or was

approved by INS, and if needed, that a visa number is available.24 The

screening does not include criminal background checks. Field officials

told us that application clerks have had some difficulty determining if visa

numbers were available and, in some cases, have accepted applications

that should have been rejected.

INS does not have agencywide quality controls to ensure that the

screening of adjustment of status applications is done properly. INS

recently issued guidance on the screening process for its service centers,

but guidance and training have not been developed for its districts. INS

also does not have a process for monitoring the quality of this screening to

ensure that it is performed consistently and correctly.

In cases where INS denies adjustment of status to applicants, their

employment authorization document is to be automatically revoked. INS

field officials told us that they send letters to denied adjustment of status

applicants informing them that INS is revoking their employment

authorization document and instructing them to return the document to

INS. According to district officials, the districts routinely collect the

employment authorization document at the time of the interview if the

case is denied at that time. This does not occur at service centers because

personal interviews with applicants do not occur at service centers. INS

officials acknowledged that many aliens fail to return the employment

authorization document. INS did not have data on the reasons why

adjustment of status cases were denied, but possible reasons for denials

included fraudulent applications, insufficient evidence, no valid underlying

 24With the exception of asylum applicants, all other applicants for adjustment of status

must be sponsored by a qualifying family member or employer. The family member or

employer is to submit a petition to INS on behalf of the applicant, and the applicant must

receive a visa number from the Department of State if INS approves the underlying

petition. There are annual limits on the total visa numbers issued.
Page 31 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

visa petition, disqualifying criminal history, or failure to submit the correct

fee.

INS also did not have data on the number of employment authorizations

they revoked after the applicant was denied adjustment of status. In fiscal

year 2000, however, INS completed adjudicating 564,000 adjustment of

status applications and denied about 80,000, or 14 percent, of them.

According to INS officials, INS had most likely granted employment

authorization to most of the denied applicants and this authorization

should have been revoked. Field office officials told us that many of the

80,000 denied applicants may have received employment benefits for 18

months or more before their employment authorization was revoked.

While waiting for adjustment of status applications to be decided, aliens

could have developed a work history that may have facilitated their

obtaining employment even after INS’ efforts to revoke the work

authorization. Although IRCA requires that aliens provide employers with

proper documentation evidencing eligibility to work in the United States,

the Commission on Immigration Reform and GAO, among others, have

issued reports discussing problems with the existing system for verifying

work authorization.

The ISD director told us that employment authorization documents are

issued before adjustment of status applications are adjudicated by INS

because it is important that deserving applicants be allowed to work as

soon as possible. He told us that it is a policy decision that is designed to

be fair to the majority of adjustment of status applicants who are approved

by INS, and it enjoys wide support in the immigration community. He said

that INS has not focused on obtaining custody of revoked employment

authorization documents because of INS’ competing priorities. He noted

that many of these documents were close to expiration at the time they

were revoked.

Long wait times have reportedly impacted applicants’ lives, prompted

lawsuits, increased INS’ workload, and taken resources away from

application processing. According to a recent study by the Catholic Legal

Immigration Network,25 some families have had to endure long separations

because of INS’ lengthy processing times and have filed lawsuits in an

attempt to expedite adjudication of their applications. For instance, an

 25Placing Immigrants at Risk: The Impact of Our Laws and Policies on American Families

(Catholic Legal Immigration Network, 2000).

Lengthy Processing Times

Have Negatively Impacted

Aliens and INS
Page 32 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

applicant, who was a spouse of an U.S. citizen, filed an application for

permanent residence in 1997. More than 22 months later, INS still had not

decided the case and the applicant’s temporary permit to remain in the

United States had expired. The applicant filed a lawsuit in August 1999 in

an effort to expedite the case. In addition, a class action lawsuit was filed

by the American Immigration Law Foundation26 and other organizations in

August 2000, alleging that INS is placing thousands of relatives of

permanent residents and U.S. citizens at risk of deportation because it is

not promptly processing applications for voluntary departure and

employment authorization filed under the statutory Family Unity Program.

The attorneys representing the plaintiffs claim that their clients face

deportation, lost jobs, or could not find work because of the long

processing delays at INS. Officials from the community-based

organizations we contacted also told us that the primary complaint they

heard from immigrants was that INS took too long to process applications.

According to an INS official, the long processing times for adjustment of

status cases have produced additional work for INS officers and additional

effort and expense for applicants. This is because applicants may apply for

employment or travel authorization during the time that their adjustment

of status applications are pending. Because INS provides employment

authorization documents that are valid for 1 year, applicants who must

wait for longer periods of time to adjust their status to permanent

residence face the need to renew their employment authorization and

must pay another application processing fee. Applicants who may need to

travel outside the United States while their adjustment of status

applications are pending must apply for travel authorization and pay a fee.

If INS had adjudicated adjustment of status applications in a timely

fashion, then applicants would not have to expend additional time and

money renewing their employment authorization or applying for travel

authorization, and INS would not have additional workload.

According to INS officials, INS has also experienced an increase in public

inquiries on pending cases due to lengthy processing times. INS has had to

shift resources to respond to public inquiries on pending cases at the cost

of processing cases, further increasing the time it takes to process

 26This lawsuit, Escutia v. Reno, was filed in U.S. District Court for the Central District of

California on August 24, 2000. An attorney for the plaintiffs told us on February 20, 2001,

that the parties were engaged in settlement discussions.
Page 33 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

applications. Data on the volume of inquiries on pending cases were not

available from INS.

INS officials identified three factors as having negatively affected INS’

ability to improve application processing times and reduce backlogs. The

most significant factor cited was inadequate automation, in general, and

lack of automation in the districts, in particular. The officials also

indicated that a shortage of adjudications staff and fingerprint problems

have caused delays in application processing. However, the most

significant problem—lack of and inadequate automation—will take years

to resolve.

Automation problems were cited by both INS field office and headquarters

staff as the number one factor affecting INS’ ability to process applications

in a timely manner and reduce backlogs. District offices, which completed

about 45 percent of all applications completed by INS in fiscal year 2000,

process most applications manually because they do not have an

automated case management and tracking system for processing most

types of applications. The key systems that INS has in place for application

processing have limitations and other performance problems that have

reduced their usefulness. INS has taken action to improve the reliability of

its existing automated systems, and it is preparing a business plan and an

information technology strategy to guide its process reengineering and

information technology improvement efforts.

To support its application processing, INS uses three primary automated

systems: the Computer-Linked Application Information Management

System 4.0 (CLAIMS 4), the Reengineered Naturalization Applications

Casework System (RNACS), and the Computer-Linked Application

Information Management System 3.0 (CLAIMS 3).

• CLAIMS 4, INS’ newest and most advanced case management and tracking

system, is the key system for helping process incoming naturalization

applications. INS deployed CLAIMS 4 to the service centers in fiscal year

1998 and subsequently phased it in at the districts. INS intends to add four

Inadequate

Automation, Staff

Shortages, and

Fingerprint Problems

Cited as Impeding

Application

Processing

Automation for Processing

Applications Has Been

Lacking or Inadequate

Multiple Automated Systems

Are Used for Case Processing
Page 34 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

naturalization-related applications27 to CLAIMS 4 by the end of fiscal year

2002.

• RNACS is used to process naturalization applications that were submitted

to INS before CLAIMS 4 was fully deployed. It is also used to process four

naturalization-related applications. INS officials expect that RNACS will be

completely phased out by the end of fiscal year 2002.

• CLAIMS 3 is used to process applications other than naturalization

applications at the 4 service centers and 2 districts—Baltimore and St.

Paul.

INS has not provided its districts with a servicewide automated case

management and tracking system for the majority of applications they

process. Instead, most applications are processed manually.28 Because

they lack automated systems for key application types, districts also do

not have a database that could be used for workload management and

staff deployment. District officials told us that they must keep manual

tallies of applications completed, and they cannot determine the number

of pending cases except by subtracting the number of completed cases

from the number received. They said that because they cannot accurately

determine the age and status of their pending workload, it is difficult for

them to identify problem areas or bottlenecks, establish processing

priorities among application types, deploy staff based on workload and

backlogs, and ensure that cases are processed in the order received. They

also said that it is resource-intensive for them to respond to applicants’

inquiries on case status without an automated system. Inquiries require

staff to expend time manually locating and reviewing case files, taking

time away from application processing.

 27The applications that will be transferred from RNACS to CLAIMS 4 include (1) application

for replacement naturalization/citizenship document (form N-565), (2) request for hearing

on a decision in naturalization proceedings (form N-336), (3) application for certification of

citizenship (form N-600), and (4) application for citizenship on behalf of an adopted child

(form N-643).

28Districts have the CLAIMS 4 and RNACS systems to help them process naturalization and

naturalization-related applications. These applications constituted 47 percent of

applications completed by district offices in fiscal year 2000. The remaining 53 percent of

the district application workload is processed manually, or by using locally developed

stand-alone systems. According to INS officials, many districts use the stand-alone Buffalo

Examinations and Tracking System to support processing of adjustment of status

applications. This system was used in the four districts we visited to record identification

information on the applicant and to print fingerprint appointment, interview, and other

notices to the applicant. This locally developed system was not used to manage and track

cases, provide statistics on cases completed, or determine the age and status of the

pending workload.

Districts Lack Servicewide

Case Management and

Tracking System for Processing

Most Application Types
Page 35 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

The ISD director acknowledged that this is a major problem for the

districts, particularly with regard to the need for automated support to

process adjustment of status cases. He told us that this issue will be

addressed as part of the business plan and the information technology

strategy being developed by INS. The business plan is being prepared to

guide all INS’ application processing reengineering efforts during the next

5 to 10 years. Concurrent with this plan, INS is also preparing an

information technology strategy to guide its automation improvements. A

contract for both these plans was awarded in March 2001. The business

plan and implementation timeline are due by the end of June 2001, and the

information technology strategy and timeline are due by the end of August

2001. Since these plans were still being developed, the details and

estimated implementation costs were not yet available.

INS’ CLAIMS 3, the key system used by service centers to support

processing of all applications other than naturalization, is reportedly

unreliable and lacks management reporting capability.

According to INS officials, CLAIMS 3 cannot be relied on because it (1) is

an antiquated system that is frequently nonoperational, and (2) does not

always update and store important case data when INS field offices

transfer data from the local CLAIMS 3 system to INS’ mainframe

computer. Problems with the reliability of CLAIMS 3 data on pending

cases was cited as a primary reason why INS undertook a time-consuming

and costly 100-percent physical inventory of all pending applications in

September 2000, as discussed on page 38.

Service center officials told us that CLAIMS 3 is a good tool for individual

case management, but is not a good tool for managing workload because it

does not provide reports to help managers identify problem areas or

bottlenecks, establish processing priorities, ensure that applications are

processed in the order received, and deploy staff. According to the

Benefits Systems Director, a widely known example of a reporting

problem with CLAIMS 3 was its inability to accurately count the number of

H-lB petitions approved in fiscal year 1999. As a result, INS exceeded the

numerical limitations set by Congress for H-1B visas.29 The ISD director

told us that CLAIMS 3 has not produced management reports since July

 29The H-1B program allows employers to temporarily fill certain specialty occupations with

foreign workers if employers can ensure that American workers are not adversely affected

in the process. In each of the fiscal years 1999 and 2000, the maximum number of H-1B

visas that could be granted was 115,000.

CLAIMS 3 System Has

Reliability Problems and

Limited Capability
Page 36 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

1994, when its management reporting function failed and could not be

fixed. He also said that CLAIMS 3 is operating far beyond its design

capacity, and this has led to frequent breakdowns. He said that INS hopes

to replace CLAIMS 3, but will continue to use it for several more years

before it will be replaced. In addition, INS is beginning to examine how to

provide management reporting capability from CLAIMS 3.

INS has launched two efforts to improve the performance of CLAIMS 3.

In fiscal year 2000 INS launched a project to resolve the capacity and

breakdown problems with CLAIMS 3 and improve its reliability by (1)

upgrading service center software and standardizing file servers used for

data storage; and (2) upgrading and standardizing service center

technology infrastructure, such as workstations, high-speed printers, and

desktop printers. INS estimates that these actions will be completed by the

end of fiscal year 2001 at a cost of about $12.4 million. In addition, INS

awarded a contract in January 2001 for an effort to ensure that data are

properly transferred from the CLAIMS 3 local area network in the field

offices to the CLAIMS mainframe, and to develop a methodology for

cleaning up the existing incomplete and unreliable data in CLAIMS 3. This

effort is due to be completed by June 2001 at a cost of $163,500. At that

point, the field offices will be responsible for implementing the

methodology and cleaning up the existing CLAIMS 3 data. No timeframes

had yet been established for the field office cleanup efforts.

CLAIMS 4, INS’ case management and tracking system for naturalization

cases, was deployed prematurely as part of INS’ response to problems

with the integrity of the naturalization process that surfaced during CUSA.

According to the ISD director, INS began to deploy CLAIMS 4 in October

1997 before it had met its baseline functional (user) requirements and

without sufficient testing. As a result, INS had to continue developing

baseline functionality for CLAIMS 4 while it was already deployed.

District and service center officials were critical of CLAIMS 4, saying that

it initially hindered productivity. For example, they said that field offices

were not able until June 2000 to correct simple data entry errors in

CLAIMS 4. If field office staff inadvertently keyed in the wrong information

on how a case was decided or whether an individual had attended an oath

ceremony, they would have to submit a request for assistance to a CLAIMS

4 “help desk” at INS headquarters. It sometimes took several months to

correct data entry errors because the help desk had more work than it

could handle. While field offices waited for the data entry errors to be

fixed, they could only proceed with processing the affected cases

manually. An ongoing CLAIMS 4 problem cited by service center staff is

CLAIMS 4 Deployed

Prematurely and Without

Reporting Capability
Page 37 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

that CLAIMS 4 cannot schedule a second fingerprint appointment when

fingerprints are unclassifiable or the FBI fingerprint check results have

expired. Therefore, a scheduling procedure that should be automated must

be handled manually, slowing the process and consuming personnel

resources.

The ISD director acknowledged that CLAIMS 4 had many performance

problems when it was first deployed, but emphasized that it has been

considerably improved during the last 3 years. INS estimates that it will

have expended about $41 million to develop, deploy, and maintain

CLAIMS 4 from July 1996 through March 31, 2001. Both headquarters and

field office officials said that CLAIMS 4 has now improved to the point

where it is aiding, rather than hampering, production.

In late fiscal year 2000, INS began working with a contractor to develop a

module for CLAIMS 4 that would generate standardized management

reports on the age and status of naturalization cases. According to the

Benefits Systems director, the major obstacle to developing reporting

modules is that using CLAIMS 4 to run reports interferes with its ability to

support application processing. INS is exploring ways to generate CLAIMS

4 management reports without slowing down the system (e.g., by

purchasing an additional server). INS has not yet established a time-frame

or cost estimate for developing and deploying the CLAIMS 4 reporting

module.

INS had intended to make CLAIMS 4 its single servicewide automated case

tracking system for all application types. According to the ISD director,

INS remains committed to implementing one automated system and is

currently reviewing how best to do so. He stated that any further

investments in INS’ existing or new automated systems for processing

applications will occur after INS completes two agencywide initiatives.

Both are being undertaken in response to our recommendations. In a

report issued in August 2000, we recommended that INS develop an

enterprise architecture to help it effectively and efficiently invest in new

and existing information systems.30 In a report issued in December 2000,

we recommended that INS develop a plan, within 9 months, for

 30Information Technology: INS Needs to Better Manage the Development of Its Enterprise

Architecture (GAO/AIMD-00-212, Aug. 1, 2000). An enterprise architecture is an information

system blueprint that defines in both business and technology terms the organization’s

current and target operating environments and provides a roadmap for moving between the

two.
Page 38 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

implementing an information technology investment management

process.31We further stated that there should be no major enhancements of

existing systems until INS implements our recommendations. We

recommended that requests for future appropriations for information

technology should be limited to efforts that are small, represent low

technical risk, and support ongoing operations and maintenance. An INS

official estimated that the enterprise architecture would be developed by

the end of December 2001, and its information technology investment

management process would be developed and provided to the Department

of Justice for approval by the end of May 2001.

INS undertook a 100-percent physical inventory (manual count) of all

applications that were pending as of September 30, 2000, because the

automated data systems did not contain sufficiently reliable data for INS

to obtain an unqualified opinion on its fiscal year 1999 financial

statements. This inventory was also needed, according to the ISD director,

because automated data were not available for most applications

processed by the districts. To carry out the inventory, INS suspended most

case processing for 2 to 3 weeks.

As part of its fiscal year 1999 financial audit, INS’ financial statement

auditors tested the pending data in CLAIMS 3 and CLAIMS 4 and found

that they were unreliable. According to the financial statement auditors,

the pending data in CLAIMS 3 were unreliable because some data did not

upload from the CLAIMS 3 local area network in the field offices centers

to the CLAIMS mainframe, making INS’ database on pending cases

incomplete and inaccurate. The primary reliability problem with the

pending data in CLAIMS 4 was that many naturalization cases started by

the service centers and completed by the districts had not been closed out

in CLAIMS 4.

Due to the data reliability problems, INS performed a 100-percent physical

inventory of pending cases to try to obtain an unqualified opinion on its

 31Information Technology: INS Needs to Strengthen Its Investment Management Capability

(GAO-01-146, Dec. 29, 2000).

INS Data Deficiencies Led to

Time-Consuming Inventory of

All Pending Applications
Page 39 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

fiscal year 2000 financial statements.32 According to senior INS officials,

the costs of the fiscal year 2000 inventory were very high in terms of lost

production and staff time because INS had to suspend almost all

application processing for 2 to 3 weeks in order to conduct the inventory.

According to the financial statement auditors, INS will have to continue to

conduct a full 100-percent physical inventory each year until it can obtain

reliable data on pending cases from its automated systems. INS was

already planning to conduct another 100-percent physical inventory at the

end of fiscal year 2001.

Despite the doubling of program staff since fiscal year 1995, officials in

INS headquarters and field offices told us that they needed additional staff

to stay current with their application workload. However, they did not

know how many additional staff they needed, where the staff should be

located, and what types of skills the staff should have. The officials told us

that this determination would be difficult because INS does not currently

have standardized workflow processes for most applications and because

the districts have limited automation. They said that field offices have

differing staff needs because their work processes differ. The ISD director

told us that INS is waiting for the development of reengineered procedures

that will standardize the workflow process for each application type

before it develops a staff resource allocation model to determine precise

staffing needs.

Officials from all the field offices we visited cited a need for more clerical

staff, immigration information officers, and computer support staff.

Officials from three of the four field offices also cited the need for more

adjudications officers. They stated that the shortage of clerical staff and

information officers (who could help adjudicate simple cases and provide

a more prompt response to applicants’ inquiries about their cases) leads to

inefficient use of adjudications officers. This is because the higher paid

officers must spend more of their time doing such tasks as searching for

 32For fiscal year 2000, INS’ auditors reported that INS was able to perform an accurate

count of pending applications and adequately support the deferred revenue balance as of

September 30, 2000. However, the auditors were not able to extend the scope of their work

to verify the number of pending applications at the beginning of the fiscal year. As a result,

the auditors qualified their opinion on INS’ statements of net cost and changes in net

position and on its combined statements of budgetary resources and financing for fiscal

year 2000. INS did receive an unqualified opinion on its balance sheet and statement of

custodial activity.

Staff Shortages Cited as

Slowing Application

Processing, but Staffing

Needs Are Unknown
Page 40 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

files and answering routine questions, rather than conducting interviews

and adjudicating applications.

To help overcome staff shortages, INS headquarters and field officials told

us, INS has relied on overtime funds since fiscal year 1994. The amount of

overtime funds increased dramatically from $1.8 million in fiscal year 1994

to $5.5 million in fiscal year 1995, and to $12.9 million in fiscal year 1996.33

INS officials told us that these increases reflected INS’ efforts to reduce

application backlogs. Since fiscal year 1997, INS overtime funds have

stayed between $11 and $17 million. (App. V includes data on overtime

costs for the 6 field offices visited.)

INS headquarters officials expressed the view that field office

Adjudications and Naturalization program staff shortages are due to (1)

high turnover of temporary staff, especially adjudications officers, and (2)

an insufficient number of permanent staff positions. In March 1999, INS

reported that the attrition rate of temporary adjudications officers was

generally more than double that of permanent officers working in the

same districts. For example, in the New York City office, the attrition rate

among temporary officers was 35 percent compared to 16 percent among

permanent officers. In the Los Angeles office, the attrition rate among

temporary officers was 28 percent compared to 9 percent among

permanent officers.

In response, Congress gave INS the authority in fiscal year 1999 to convert

50 percent (300 of 600) of its temporary district adjudications officer

positions to permanent positions. In fiscal year 2001, INS had plans to hire

50 additional contract clerical staff and to redeploy 87 clerical and 103

adjudications officer positions from 8 districts to 14 other districts that

have a greater need based on workload and current staffing.

INS has not performed a systematic analysis of its staffing needs to

determine the number of additional staff needed, where they should be

located, or what type of staff are needed to assist with application

processing. INS headquarters officials told us that this would be difficult to

do because INS’ field offices differed in their workflow processes and their

automation capabilities. They said that after INS reengineers its

application processes, INS would develop a staff allocation model to

 33According to INS officials, they do not track the number of overtime hours worked by

officers, clerical, and contractor staffs who use these overtime funds.
Page 41 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

efficiently distribute the right kind and number of staff to the right

locations.

INS continues to experience processing delays associated with FBI

fingerprint check results, which expire after 15 months. However, INS has

made progress in resolving long-standing problems with the quality and

integrity of its fingerprinting process and missing fingerprints and

fingerprint check results.

The results of fingerprint checks conducted by the FBI to determine if

applicants have criminal backgrounds that make them ineligible for

immigration benefits are valid for 15 months. The expiration of the results

of FBI fingerprint checks continue to cause processing delays at INS

because a large portion of INS’ application backlog has been pending for

well over a year. INS’ valuation study (discussed on p. 27) found that as of

October 2000, about 335,000 naturalization applications and about 250,000

adjustment of status applications had been pending for at least 21 months.

The majority of these applicants’ fingerprint results would have expired

because INS’ practice was to fingerprint applicants shortly after the

application was received. Fingerprint result expirations have been

particularly problematic for adjustment of status cases, according to field

office and headquarters officials. This is because the number of

adjustment of status cases completed in fiscal year 1999 decreased as a

result of INS’ focus on reducing naturalization backlogs, and the projected

processing times grew to 47 months.

If fingerprint check results expire, INS refingerprints the applicant and

submits the fingerprints to the FBI to conduct another criminal

background check for the individual. Field office officials estimated that

this adds about 4 to 8 weeks to case processing time. In addition to

delaying case processing, expired fingerprint check results inconvenience

applicants who must go to an ASC to be fingerprinted a second time and

cause INS to incur the additional costs of retaking the fingerprints and

paying the FBI to analyze them. The fingerprints must be retaken because

neither INS nor the FBI retain them for future use. INS did not have data

on the total number of fingerprint check expirations and the additional

funds expended by INS to refingerprint applicants. However, fingerprint

expirations can be costly to INS. INS estimated that it costs about $48 for

INS to take and process fingerprints. In addition, according to an INS

official, INS must pay the FBI $16 to perform each fingerprint check.

Expired Fingerprint

Results Are Problematic,

but INS Has Made

Progress Resolving Several

Problems With

Fingerprinting

Expiration of Fingerprint

Check Results Delay

Application Processing and

Result in Additional Costs to

INS
Page 42 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Although fingerprint costs are included in the fees charged to applicants,

INS bears the cost of refingerprinting aliens if it does not adjudicate the

case within 15 months and the fingerprint results expire. At an estimated

cost of $64 per person, INS may have incurred about $37 million in

additional costs to refingerprint over 585,000 naturalization and

adjustment of status applicants whose applications had been pending for

at least 21 months as of October 2000.

INS officials told us that the problem of fingerprint check expirations

lessened in fiscal year 2000 because INS gave adjustment of status cases

priority and field offices did a better job of managing fingerprint

scheduling for adjustment of status cases. Since April 1999, the field

offices have been instructed to better manage the scheduling of

fingerprinting to minimize the number of fingerprint expirations. Field

office officials told us that they have responded by scheduling fingerprint

appointments for adjustment of status applicants closer to the estimated

interview date rather than shortly after the application is received to avoid

fingerprint expirations.

INS has made progress in resolving several problems that it had previously

experienced with fingerprinting. For example, as we recommended in

1994,34 INS implemented a policy in November 1996 requiring that the

agency obtain the results of FBI fingerprint checks before deciding a case.

This policy helps INS ensure that it does not provide immigration benefits

to individuals who have disqualifying criminal backgrounds. In fiscal year

1997, according to a senior INS official, INS implemented an automated

tracking system to help ensure that fingerprints were sent to and results

received from the FBI. In fiscal year 1998, INS established application

support centers to provide greater control over the fingerprint process.

The quality of fingerprints taken and fingerprint processing times have

also improved.

A problem with missing fingerprints and fingerprint check results that

began in 1997 was resolved by the end of 2000, according to INS officials.

The problem, according to INS officials, was associated with a new system

employed by the FBI involving machine readable data tapes. Under this

system, FBI required its participating agencies to submit both fingerprint

cards and a tape identifying the applicant, and the FBI recorded the

 34INS Fingerprinting of Aliens: Efforts to Ensure Authenticity of Aliens’ Fingerprints

(GAO/GGD-95-40, Dec. 22, 1994).

Progress Made in Resolving

Problems With Fingerprinting

Quality and Missing

Fingerprints and Fingerprint

Check Results
Page 43 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

fingerprint check results on the tape and returned it to the agency.

According to INS officials, tapes and fingerprint cards frequently

disappeared or were damaged during shipment or the tapes were missing

some fingerprint check results. INS data indicate that from June 1999

through March 2000, INS resent 228,356 fingerprints to the FBI because

INS had not received FBI responses for them. In many of these cases,

according to a senior INS official, INS had to take new fingerprints from

the applicant because the fingerprint card could not be found or had

already been destroyed by the FBI, and INS incurred the additional costs

of retaking the fingerprints and paying for the FBI analysis.

Beginning in November 1999, the FBI replaced the tape system with the

one currently in use: the Integrated Automated Fingerprint Information

System. This system involves electronic submission of fingerprints to the

FBI and electronic transmission of the FBI fingerprint results to the

requesting agency. Both field office and headquarters officials indicated

that the new system, based on its performance in fiscal year 2000, seems

to have corrected the problem of missing FBI fingerprint results. Most FBI

responses are received within 24 hours of submission, including electronic

rap sheets on persons identified as having an arrest record. INS’

performance measure for fiscal year 2000 was to reduce the average

amount of time between fingerprinting the alien and receiving the FBI

results from 3 weeks to 1 week. With implementation of the new system,

the processing time was reduced to 1 day in the final quarter of fiscal year

2000.

INS is considering exploring whether to electronically store fingerprints,

according to the ISD director. Storage of electronic fingerprints would

avert the need to retake fingerprints should the FBI results expire. Stored

fingerprints would also allow INS to avoid the time and cost of retaking

fingerprints for the same applicant applying for subsequent immigration

benefits, such as adjustment of status applicants who become eligible to

apply for citizenship.

In addition to actions taken by INS in response to specific identified

problems—such as hiring temporary staff to address staff shortages and

changing the point in the application process that fingerprints are taken in

order to reduce the incidence of expired results—INS has taken or is

considering other actions to better manage application processing. These

actions, which we believe are steps in the right direction, include (1)

launching production management initiatives to reduce application

backlogs; (2) establishing a National Records Center to consolidate

storage and expedite retrieval of alien files; and (3) reengineering the

Other Actions Taken

or Planned to Improve

Application

Processing
Page 44 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

processes used to adjudicate adjustment of status and seven other

applications.

INS created an Office of Production Management35 to direct and oversee

INS’ backlog reduction efforts. The efforts of this office have included

guiding and monitoring the application production activities of field

offices, establishing teams to reduce the processing time of continued

cases, and focusing processing efforts on the oldest pending

naturalization—those filed prior to July 1, 1998.

In fiscal year 1998, INS created the Office of Production Management

within the Immigration Services Division to lead its efforts to reduce

naturalization backlogs. This office was responsible for directing and

monitoring field office backlog reduction efforts, evaluating and directing

resources, providing analytical services, and ensuring that any problems

delaying application processing were identified and resolved. Beginning in

fiscal year 2000, reducing the backlog of adjustment of status applications

was added to its responsibilities.

The Production Management Office initially focused on reducing

naturalization backlogs in the five districts that received the highest

number of naturalization applications—Chicago, Los Angeles, Miami, New

York City, and San Francisco. Each of the five districts was required to

develop a backlog reduction plan. By August 31, 1998, the other 28

districts were also required to submit backlog reduction plans. For each

field office, INS established an annual production goal for naturalization

applications beginning in fiscal year 1999, and for adjustment of status

applications beginning in fiscal year 2000. INS required each field office to

submit a weekly production report and a monthly production plan for

meeting its goals. A backlog reduction team comprised of representatives

from INS headquarters, service centers, regional offices, and districts, was

responsible for monitoring production efforts in the field offices. INS

officials credit the leadership of the Office of Production Management and

the cooperative efforts of the field offices in helping INS meet its

production goals in fiscal years 1999 and 2000.

A contractor study conducted for INS indicated that about 43 percent of

7,843 naturalization cases surveyed were continued. An applicant’s case

 35Called the Office of Backlog Reduction when it was first created in 1998.

Production Management

Efforts Intended to Reduce

Backlogs and Improve

Timeliness

Efforts to Reduce Backlogs of

Naturalization and Adjustment

of Status Cases

Efforts to Reduce Backlogs of

Continued Naturalization Cases
Page 45 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

may be continued, rather than approved or denied, for several reasons,

including missing documentation in the case file,36 failure to appear for the

interview, failure to pass the English or civics test, and expired fingerprint

results. INS did not have data indicating how long it takes to finish

processing applications once they are continued, but an INS official told

us that cases can be continued for long periods of time. This is because

INS adjudicators move on to other applications that may be quicker to

process and, with no data system to inform them whether they are

working on cases in the order in which they were received, they do not get

feedback on the number or age of continued cases.

INS has many pending naturalization cases that were submitted before

July 1998. INS reported that, as of August 25, 2000, about 165,000

naturalization applications submitted before July 1998 were still pending.

These cases had not yet been adjudicated, according to an INS official,

because (1) in fiscal years 1997 and 1998, they were inadvertently dropped

in the course of transferring data from one automated system used by

service centers (CLAIMS 3) to another used by district offices (RNACS)

and (2) districts focused on completing new, rather than continued, cases.

Since May 2000, INS has assigned priority to completing these pre-July

1998 cases. INS officials could not project when these naturalization cases

would be completed, but they said they were monitoring progress and,

since August 2000, have required the field offices to submit biweekly

reports on the status of these cases. As of March 1, 2001, INS reported that

there were about 63,000 naturalization cases still pending that were

submitted before July 1998. (See app.V for statistics on the pre-July 1998

naturalization cases for the four districts we visited.)

To help reduce the backlog of continued cases, INS’ Production

Management Office implemented a continuation review team initiative in

March 2000. The team, comprised of adjudications officers and managers

from the regions and districts, was tasked with reviewing and improving

district office procedures for handling continued cases. The team

reviewed five districts in fiscal year 2000, including San Francisco, Atlanta,

Harlingen, Houston, and Los Angeles. These districts were reportedly

selected because they had a relatively large number of continued cases

based on their monthly production plans or were known to have

implemented some improvements or best practices in this area. In

 36A 1998 PricewaterhouseCoopers survey found that the most common missing documents

were alien files, court arrest dispositions, medical/disability reports, and tax returns.
Page 46 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

addition, INS wanted to include districts from each of the three INS

regions.

Two of the districts we visited had received continuation team reviews in

fiscal year 2000—Houston in May and Los Angeles in June. According to

the team’s report for Houston, during fiscal year 1999, Houston had

focused primarily on completing new cases rather than continued ones. In

fiscal year 2000, however, Houston initiated improvements to its

processing of continued cases. Houston began to focus on its backlog of

continued naturalization cases and set a timeframe of 60 days for

adjudications officers to complete cases continued for additional

documentation. The report made no recommendations for improving the

processing of continued cases by the Houston district.

The team’s report for Los Angeles noted that in fiscal year 1998, Los

Angeles had centralized its more complicated continued cases and formed

a continuation unit at the main district office to complete continued cases.

The report recommended that the Los Angeles district track continued

cases and implement a system at 30-, 60- and 90-day intervals that would

call up continued cases and hold adjudications officers accountable for

their completion.

According to INS officials, the continuation review team is an effective

tool for improving the management of continued cases. They said they

plan to expand the work of the team during fiscal year 2001 to include

continued adjustment of status cases.

A major problem revealed by CUSA was that INS had difficulty locating

alien files and having them available on a timely basis for review by

adjudicators.37 Many naturalization cases during CUSA were adjudicated

without INS locating and reviewing the alien file, thereby increasing the

likelihood of adjudication errors.

Congress approved the establishment of the INS National Records Center

in October 1998. The creation of the center had been under discussion for

almost 2 decades. The records center opened November 15, 1999, in a

leased underground facility in Lee’s Summit, MO. Before the center

opened, INS stored files at more than 80 field offices. The primary mission

 37The alien file, or administrative file, is INS’ hard-copy repository of information on aliens.

INS National Records

Center Established to

Expedite Retrieval of Alien

Files
Page 47 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

of the record center is to provide timely access to information from alien

files and subsidiary automated data systems by consolidating records in

one location and using state-of-the-art records management technology.

INS expects to transfer all alien files to the center by June 2001, according

to the center’s director.

INS expects application processing time to improve as a result of

centralizing alien files. Having the record center, according to senior INS

officials, will enable INS adjudicators to obtain needed alien files within a

few days, as opposed to the weeks or months that it took under the

decentralized system. Additionally, it will increase the likelihood that the

alien files will be found. The center’s standard for responding to requests

(i.e., locating and shipping the alien file) is 3 days. According to

information provided by the center, the average response time for

February through August 2000 was 2.3 days. As of November 22, 2000, the

center had responded to approximately 370,000 file transfer requests and

had located all but 50 files.

INS is evaluating a study submitted by an INS contractor at the end of

fiscal year 1999 for reengineering adjustment of status and seven other

types of applications.38 Collectively, the applications included in the study

represented 71 percent of INS’ workload in fiscal year 1998. INS initiated

the reengineering effort because it believed that many aspects of the

naturalization reengineering effort could also be applied to other

application processes. In addition, INS had experienced nearly a five-fold

increase in its pending workload between fiscal years 1992 and 1998 for

these eight application types. The reengineering study found that INS

lacked standardized processes, the integrity of INS processes could be

strengthened, and opportunities existed to better utilize technology. With

regard to processes, the study found that applications were not

consistently adjudicated because the procedures used to process

applications varied by office, most field offices allowed their adjudicators

to review cases using minimal guidelines, and standard quality controls

were lacking. In addition, productivity and processing times varied across

 38The study is entitled Immigration Benefits Reengineering Final Draft Report

(PricewaterhouseCoopers, Sept. 30, 1999). The forms included in the study, in order of

volume were (1) I-765, application for employment authorization (23%); (2) I-130, petition

for alien relative immigrant visa (14%); (3) I-485, application for adjustment of status (10%);

(4) I-131, application for travel document (9%); (5) I-129, petition for a nonimmigrant

worker (7%); (6) I-90, application to replace permanent resident card (6%); (7) I-140,

immigrant petition for alien worker (1%); and (8) I-526, immigrant petition by alien

entrepreneur (less than 1%).

Reengineering of

Applications
Page 48 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

field offices, and a lot of time was spent locating and moving alien files.

The technical support priorities of field office staff cited in the study

included the need for enhancing case management and tracking,

minimizing duplicative data entry, and providing information for

management reporting and decision making.

The study recommended implementing new consolidated processes and

forms, quality controls, and a comprehensive fraud-prevention program. It

also recommended creating an electronic alien file to reduce paper file

movement and costs, and a servicewide automated case management and

tracking system for all applications. The ISD director told us that INS is

evaluating these recommendations and will make decisions regarding

them after completing two related strategic plans currently being

developed to guide INS’ improvement efforts during the next 5 years—the

business strategic plan for reengineering application processing and the

information technology strategic plan. He estimated that it will take 5

years or more for INS to develop and implement the reengineered

processes and implement a servicewide automated system to process all

types of applications.

INS continues to experience significant problems managing its application

workload despite years of increasing budgets and staff. Notwithstanding

having paid fees to INS for processing their applications, aliens face long

waits for a resolution to their case and have difficulty obtaining accurate

information on how long they can expect to wait. INS acknowledges, and

we agree, that it needs better automation capability and a more

streamlined application process to provide improved levels of service.

Automation improvements, including improvements to the reliability of

data in CLAIMS 3 and CLAIMS 4, would provide INS with the management

information it needs to determine how long aliens have been waiting for

their applications to be processed. Automation improvements would also

help INS determine whether it is processing all the applications it receives,

working on applications in the order in which they are received, and

providing prompt and correct responses to applicants’ inquiries about the

status of their cases.

Although INS believes that additional staff would reduce its application

backlog problem, it is not now in a position to determine the extent to

which staff shortages play a part in this problem. INS does not know how

to maximize the deployment of staff to process applications in a timely

fashion because it lacks a systematically developed staff resource

allocation model. Such a model could help INS determine the right number

Conclusions
Page 49 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

and types of staff it needs, efficiently distribute staff to the right locations,

and ensure that resources are deployed commensurate with the workload

to minimize backlogs and processing times.

INS’ policy of minimizing wait times by granting work authorization to

aliens before it fully adjudicates their adjustment of status cases has

provided thousands of aliens with the opportunity to work in the United

States. However, many of these aliens were later denied permanent

resident status, and while INS reportedly revoked their employment

authorization, these aliens had already been allowed to work for many

months and develop a work history that may facilitate obtaining future

employment. INS could reduce the need to revoke employment

authorization documents by providing guidance and training on

application screening to its district staff and taking steps to ascertain

whether improvements could be made to the application screening

process.

INS’ long-standing problems with its fingerprinting process, including

poor-quality fingerprints and ensuring that all fingerprint check results are

obtained, appear to have been largely corrected. Nevertheless, because

over 585,000 applicants had been waiting at least 21 months for their

naturalization and adjustment of status applications to be decided as of

October 2000, fingerprint check expirations continue to be problematic for

pending cases. With digital technology now being used by INS to

fingerprint aliens and transmit the fingerprints electronically to the FBI,

there may be opportunities to store the fingerprints electronically and save

the time and expense associated with the refingerprinting process.

We recommend that the INS Commissioner ensure that INS do the

following:

• Develop the capability and begin to calculate and report actual processing

times for applications as soon as reliable automated data are available

from CLAIMS 3 and CLAIMS 4. This includes naturalization applications

processed by service centers and districts and all other applications

processed by service centers.

• Develop guidance and training for districts on how to screen adjustment of

status applications in order to reduce the number of errors made in the

initial review process that is used to determine whether individuals whose

adjustment of status applications are pending should be granted work

authorization.

• Periodically review a sample of denied adjustment of status cases

processed at service centers and districts to determine how many and

Recommendations for

Executive Action
Page 50 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

what types of cases should not have been granted employment

authorization during the screening process. This could provide useful

feedback to INS on how it may improve its guidance and training for

conducting the initial reviews of adjustment of status applications.

• Develop a staffing model for processing naturalization applications and

expand the model to include other application types as their processes are

reengineered and automated.

• Prepare a cost-benefit analysis on the digital storage of fingerprints. As

part of this analysis, INS should calculate the time and cost savings that

would result from eliminating the need to refingerprint applicants whose

fingerprint check results expire. INS should also calculate the costs that

INS or the FBI would incur as a result of storing the fingerprints.

We requested comments on a draft of this report from the Attorney

General. In a letter dated April 20, 2001, which we have reprinted in

appendix VII, the INS Executive Associate Commissioner for Field

Operations concurred with the report and its recommendations.

We have also included in the final report technical comments and

suggestions from INS as appropriate.

As arranged with your office, unless you publicly announce the contents of

this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 30 days after its

issue date. At that time, we will send copies to the Honorable John

Ashcroft, Attorney General; Kevin Rooney, Acting Commissioner,

Immigration and Naturalization Service; and other interested parties. We

will also make copies available to others upon request.

The major contributors to this report are acknowledged in appendix VIII.

If you or your staff have any questions on this report, please call me or Evi

Rezmovic on (202) 512-8777.

Richard M. Stana

Director, Justice Issues

Agency Comments

and Our Evaluation
Appendix I: List of INS Applications and

Petitions Processed at the Service Centers,

Districts, and Application Support Centers

Page 51 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Form

number Type of application or petitiona

Service

centersb

District

offices

I-17 Petition for Approval of School for Attendance by Nonimmigrant Students X

I-90 Application to Replace Permanent Resident Card X X

I-102 Application for Replacement/Initial Nonimmigrant Arrival/Departure Record X X

I-129 Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker X

I-130 Petition for Alien Relative X X

I-131 Application for Travel Document X X

I-134 Affidavit of Support X

I-140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker X

I-191 Application for Advance Permission to Return to Unrelinquished Domicile X X

I-192 Application for Advance Permission to Enter as Nonimmigrant X X

I-193 Application for Waiver of Passport and/or Visa X

I-212 Application for Permission to Reapply for Admission Into the United States After

Deportation or Removal X X

I-246 Application for Stay of Deportation or Removal X

I-290B Notice of Appeal to the Administrative Appeals Unit X X

I-352 Immigration Bond X

I-360 Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er), or Special Immigrant X X

I-408 Application to Pay Off or Discharge Alien Crewman X

I-485 Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust StatuscX X

I-526 Immigrant Petition by Alien Entrepreneur X

I-539 Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status X X

I-566 Inter-agency Record of Individual Requesting Change/Adjustment to or from A or G Status;

or Requesting A, G, or NATO Dependent Employment Authorization X

I-589 Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal X

I-600 Petition to Classify Orphan as an Immediate Relative X

I-601 Application for Waiver of Grounds of Excludability X X

I-612 Application for Waiver of the Foreign Residence Requirement X X

I-643 Health and Human Services Statistical Data for Refugee/Asylee Adjusting Status X

I-690 Application for Waiver of Grounds of Excludability (Under Sections 219 or 245A of the

Immigration and Nationality Act) X X

I-693 Medical Examination of Aliens Seeking Adjustment of Status X

I-694 Notice of Appeal of Decision (Under Sections 210 or 245A of the Immigration and

Nationality Act) X X

I-695 Application of Temporary Replacement Card X X

I-698 Application to Adjust Status from Temporary to Permanent Resident (Under Section 245A

of P.L. 99-603) X

I-730 Refugee/Asylee Relative Petition X

I-751 Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence X X

I-765 Application for Employment Authorization X X

I-817 Application for Voluntary Departure Under the Family Unity Program X

I-821 Application for Temporary Protected Status X X

I-824 Application for Action on an Approved Application or Petition X X

I-829 Petition by Entrepreneur to Remove Conditions X

I-864 Affidavit of Support (Under Section 213 of the Immigration and Nationality Act) X X

Appendix I: List of INS Applications and

Petitions Processed at the Service Centers,

Districts, and Application Support Centers
Appendix I: List of INS Applications and

Petitions Processed at the Service Centers,

Districts, and Application Support Centers

Page 52 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Form

number Type of application or petitiona

Service

centersb

District

offices

I-881 Application for Suspension of Deportation or Special Rule Cancellation of Removal (Under

Section 203 of P.L. 105-100 (NACARA)) X

N-300 Application to File Declaration of Intention X

N-336 Request for Hearing on a Decision in Naturalization Proceedings Under Section 336 of the

Immigration and Nationality Act X

N-400 Application for Naturalization X X

N-410 Application for Motion for Amendment of Petition X

N-426 Request for Certification of Military or Naval Service X

N-455 Application for Transfer of Petition for Naturalization X

N-470 Application to Preserve Residence for Naturalization Purposes X

N-565 Application for Replacement Naturalization/Citizenship Document X X

N-600 Application for Certification of Citizenship by Parent, or Grandparent (Supplement A) X X

N-643 Application for Certificate of Citizenship on Behalf of an Adopted Child by Parent, or

Grandparent (Supplement A) X X

N-644 Application for Posthumous Citizenship X

N-648 Medical Certification for Disability Exceptions X

a

Some types of applications and petitions are processed jointly at both the service centers and district

offices. As of June 2000, the responsibility for processing applications to renew permanent resident

cards was transferred to the application support centers. The districts remain responsible for

processing applications to replace cards that were lost or stolen, while the service centers process

applications to replace cards and issue initial cards for special agricultural workers.

b

Some types of applications and petitions are not processed at all four service centers. Applications

that are uniquely processed at one or two service centers are also included in this category.

c

Referred to as adjustment of status application throughout the report.

Source: INS.
Appendix II: Description of Major INS

Application and Petition Forms

Page 53 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Type of application Description

Application for Naturalization

(N-400)

This form is used by permanent residents18 years old or older to apply to become a

naturalized citizen of the United States.

Application to Register Permanent

Residence or Adjust Status (I-485)a

This form is used by a person who is in the United States to apply to adjust to permanent

resident status or to register for permanent residence. This form is also used by certain

Cuban nationals to request to change the date of lawful permanent residence in the

United States.

Application to Replace Permanent

Resident Card (I-90)

This form is used by permanent residents and conditional residents to apply for

replacement of lost permanent resident cards, or renewal of permanent resident cards

that have expired.

Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker

(I-129)

Employers use this form to petition on behalf of an alien (certain nonimmigrant workers)

to enable the alien to come to the United States temporarily to perform services or labor,

or to receive training by the employer. This form is also used to petition for an extension

of stay or change of status.

Petition for Alien Relative (I-130) A U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident of the United States may file this form to

establish the relationship of certain alien relatives who wish to immigrate to the United

States as a permanent resident.

Application for Travel Document (I-131) This form is used to apply for a: (1) reentry permit, (2) refugee travel document, or (3)

advance parole document. Permanent or conditional residents apply for reentry to the

United States (if returning from a trip abroad of more than a year’s duration) without

having to obtain a returning resident visa from an American consulate. Applicants in a

refugee or asylee status must obtain a refugee travel document to return to the United

States after temporary travel abroad. Applicants with a pending adjustment-of-status

application must apply for advance parole if they are seeking to travel abroad temporarily

for emergent personal or bona fide business reasons. In addition, if a person is outside

the United States and must travel to the United States temporarily for emergent business

or personal reasons, he or she may apply for an advance parole document to be paroled

into the United States on humanitarian grounds if he or she cannot obtain the necessary

visa and any required waiver of excludability. Parole cannot be used to circumvent

normal visa issuing procedures, and it is not a means to bypass delays in visa issuance.

Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker

(I-140)

This form is used by an employer to petition for an alien worker to immigrate to the United

States based on employment.

Application to Extend/Change

Nonimmigrant Status (I-539)

This form is used for a nonimmigrant to apply for an extension of stay in the United States

or to change to another nonimmigrant status.

Petition to Remove the Conditions on

Residence (I-751)

This form is used by a conditional resident who obtained such status through marriage to

apply to have the conditions removed on his or her resident status.

Application for Employment Authorization

(I-765)

This form is used by certain aliens temporarily in the United States to request an

employment authorization document. The employment authorization document is valid for

1 year, and applicants must renew it if it expires.

a

Referred to as adjustment of status application throughout the report.

Source: INS.

Appendix II: Description of Major INS

Application and Petition Forms
Appendix III: INS Naturalization and

Adjustment of Status Processing Flowcharts

Page 54 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 6: Application for Naturalization (Form N-400) Flowchart

Appendix III: INS Naturalization and

Adjustment of Status Processing Flowcharts

Service center processing steps 

Accepted Data 

entered

into 

CLAIMS 4

Fees

deposited

and receipt

sent to 

applicant

Criminal

background

checked by 

FBI

Fingerprinting

appointment

scheduled

Alien file

reviewed

and

additional

evidence

requested

Rejected

Application

and fees

returned to

applicant

Eligibility

checked by

application

clerk?

N-400

application

and fees 

received

at service 

center

Interview

scheduled A
Appendix III: INS Naturalization and

Adjustment of Status Processing Flowcharts

Page 55 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Note: All naturalization applications are initially processed at the service centers and then transferred

to a district for interview and adjudication.

a

Supervisory review is performed on any case that may be denied because the applicant has a

criminal history or a medical disability or the alien file cannot be located.

Alien file

sent from

service 

center to

district

office

Yes

Continued Yes

Reverified

by another

adjudicator

Oath

ceremony

scheduled

Case

closed

out in 

CLAIMS 4

Applicant

sworn in as

citizen

End. Alien 

file sent to

National 

Records

Center

for storage

No

Is the

N-400

approvable?

Is N-400 No

approvable?

N-400 denial

notice sent

to applicant

after 

supervisory

review a

N-400 denial 

notice sent

A

N-400 continued

for additional

evidence, 

investigation,

or re-examination

District office processing steps 

Applicant

interviewed

and 

civics and

English tests

administered
Appendix III: INS Naturalization and

Adjustment of Status Processing Flowcharts

Page 56 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 7: District Application for Adjustment of Status (Form-485) Flowchart for Family-Based Applications

Accepted Data 

entered

into local 

automated 

systems,

if any

Fees

deposited

and receipt

sent to 

applicant

Name 

checked

by Central

Intelligence

Agency

Fingerprinting

appointment

scheduled

Criminal

background

checked by

FBI

Interview

scheduled

Accepted

(if I-765 filed a)

Appointment scheduled for 

employment authorization

document (EAD) 

Rejected

Application

and fees

returned to

applicant

Eligibility

checked by

application

clerk?

I-485 

application

and fees 

received

at district

Applicant

interviewed

EAD adjudicated and issued

within 90 days of receiving 

I-765 application

A
Appendix III: INS Naturalization and

Adjustment of Status Processing Flowcharts

Page 57 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Note: The districts primarily receive and adjudicate family-based adjustment of status applications.

a

Form I-765 is the Application for Employment Authorization.

Yes

Yes

Alien resident

card issued

End. Alien file 

sent to National

Records Center

for storage

Continued

I-485 continued for additional No

evidence or investigation

No

I-485 denial

notice sent

to applicant

after 

supervisory

review

Is the I-485

approvable?

Is the I-485

approvable?

I-485 denial

notice sent

to applicant

after 

supervisory

review

A

A
Appendix III: INS Naturalization and

Adjustment of Status Processing Flowcharts

Page 58 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 8: Service Center Application for Adjustment of Status (Form I-485) Flowchart for Employment-Based Applications

Accepted

Data entered

into CLAIMS 3

Fees deposited

and receipt sent

to applicant

Name checked

by Central

Intelligence

Agency

Fingerprinting

appointment

scheduled

Applicant

interviewed

Appointment scheduled for 

employment authorization

document (EAD) 

Rejected

Application

and fees

returned to

applicant

Eligibility

checked by

application

clerk?

I-485 application

and fees received

at service center

EAD adjudicated and issued

within 90 days of receiving 

I-765 application

A

Accepted

(if I-765 filed a)

Criminal

background

checked by

FBI
Appendix III: INS Naturalization and

Adjustment of Status Processing Flowcharts

Page 59 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Note: The service centers primarily receive and adjudicate employment-based adjustment of status

applications. If the adjudicator determines that an interview is needed, the case is transferred to a

district office for interview and adjudication.

a

Form I-765 is the Application for Employment Authorization.

A

Yes

Yes

Alien

resident

card issued

Case closed 

out in CLAIMS 3

End. Alien file 

sent to National

Records Center

for storage

Continued

I-485 continued for additional No

evidence or interview at

district office

No

I-485 denial

notice sent

to applicant

after 

supervisory

review

Is the

I-485

approvable?

Is the I-485

approvable?

I-485 denial

notice sent

to applicant

after 

supervisory

review

A
Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major

Types of Applications

Page 60 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 9: Application for Naturalization (Form N-400) Workload Compared to

Completions

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Pending + applications received 812,545 1,274,199 1,982,669 2,096,781 2,373,353 2,568,248 1,816,382

Completions 444,074 505,913 1,334,180 713,153 610,547 1,252,420 1,297,986

Note: Workload is the sum of pending applications at the beginning of the fiscal year plus applications

received during the fiscal year.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.

Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major

Types of Applications

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of applications (in thousands)

Fiscal year

Pending plus applications received

Completions
Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major

Types of Applications

Page 61 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 10: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Applications for Naturalization

(Form N-400)

Note: Data include adjudications officers’ overtime, but not the time they spent on administrative

activities (e.g., training or leave). According to an INS official, data do not always include time INS

officers, such as inspectors, were detailed to the Adjudications and Naturalization program because

INS does not consistently collect these data.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Officer workyears 155 172 400 434 466 660 618

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of officer workyears

Fiscal year
Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major

Types of Applications

Page 62 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 11: Application for Adjustment of Status (Form I-485) Workload Compared to

Completions

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Pending + applications received 442,417 698,786 967,315 1,194,750 1,226,785 1,264,740 1,512,955

Completions 341,759 357,567 541,867 477,974 416,392 299,890 564,131

Note: Workload is the sum of pending applications at the beginning of the fiscal year plus applications

received during the fiscal year.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of applications (in thousands)

Fiscal year

Pending plus applications received

Completions
Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major

Types of Applications

Page 63 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 12: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Adjustment of Status Applications

(Form I-485)

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Officer workyears 116 128 197 280 253 197 240

Note: Data include adjudications officers’ overtime, but not the time they spent on administrative

activities (e.g., training or leave). According to an INS official, data do not always include time INS

officers, such as inspectors, were detailed to the Adjudications and Naturalization program because

INS does not consistently collect these data.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of officer workyears

Fiscal year
Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major

Types of Applications

Page 64 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 13: Application to Replace Permanent Residence Card (Form I-90) Workload

Compared to Completions

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Pending + applications received 581,861 661,077 583,0911 1365,553 383,842 527,156 875,485

Completions 442,909 543,171 486,906 260,009 146,441 259,386 718,172

Note: Workload is the sum of pending applications at the beginning of the fiscal year plus applications

received during the fiscal year.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of applications (in thousands)

Fiscal year

Pending plus applications received

Completions
Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major

Types of Applications

Page 65 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 14: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Applications to Replace Permanent

Residence Card (Form I-90)

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Officer workyears 38 52 52 38 23 39 67

Note: Data include adjudications officers’ overtime, but not the time they spent on administrative

activities (e.g., training or leave). According to an INS official, data do not always include time INS

officers, such as inspectors, were detailed to the Adjudications and Naturalization program because

INS does not consistently collect these data.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of officer workyears

Fiscal year
Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major

Types of Applications

Page 66 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 15: Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker (Form I-129) Workload Compared to

Completions

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Pending + applications received 309,655 284,507 295,242 327,301 406,675 551,3397 764,236

Completions 318,894 272,817 300,029 327,481 385,493 527,104 698,127

Note: Workload is the sum of pending applications at the beginning of the fiscal year plus applications

received during the fiscal year.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of applications (in thousands)

Fiscal year

Pending plus applications received

Completions
Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major

Types of Applications

Page 67 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 16: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Petitions for Nonimmigrant Worker

(Form I-129)

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Officer workyears 42 47 46 51 55 77 82

Note: Data include adjudications officers’ overtime, but not the time they spent on administrative

activities (e.g., training or leave). According to an INS official, data do not always include time INS

officers, such as inspectors, were detailed to the Adjudications and Naturalization program because

INS does not consistently collect these data.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.

0

20

40

60

80

100

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of officer workyears

Fiscal year
Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major

Types of Applications

Page 68 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 17: Petition for Alien Relative (Form I-130) Workload Compared to

Completions

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Pending + applications received 747,369 811,878 939,389 1,127,798 1,150,032 1,020,319 1,190,768

Completions 619,213 629,163 758,388 763,822 593,315 449,539 383,468

Note: Workload is the sum of pending applications at the beginning of the fiscal year plus applications

received during the fiscal year.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of applications (in thousands)

Fiscal year

Pending plus applications received

Completions
Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major

Types of Applications

Page 69 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 18: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Petitions for Alien Relative

(Form I-130)

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Officer workyears 102 101 124 138 111 89 78

Note: Data include adjudications officers’ overtime, but not the time they spent on administrative

activities (e.g., training or leave). According to an INS official, data do not always include time INS

officers, such as inspectors, were detailed to the Adjudications and Naturalization program because

INS does not consistently collect these data.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of officer workyears

Fiscal year
Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major

Types of Applications

Page 70 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 19: Application for Travel Document (Form I-131) Workload Compared to

Completions

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Pending + applications received 290,117 310,628 363,613 418,265 531,660 491,856 595,513

Completions 264,454 283,457 330,981 356,458 506,531 398,354 468,451

Note: Workload is the sum of pending applications at the beginning of the fiscal year plus applications

received during the fiscal year.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of applications (in thousands)

Fiscal year

Pending plus applications received

Completions
Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major

Types of Applications

Page 71 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 20: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Applications for Travel Document

(Form I-131)

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Officer workyears 20 20 31 40 45 40 42

Note: Data include adjudications officers’ overtime, but not the time they spent on administrative

activities (e.g., training or leave). According to an INS official, data do not always include time INS

officers, such as inspectors, were detailed to the Adjudications and Naturalization program because

INS does not consistently collect these data.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.

0

10

20

30

40

50

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of officer workyears

Fiscal year
Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major

Types of Applications

Page 72 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 21: Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Form I-140) Workload Compared to

Completions

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Pending + applications received 52,402 58,472 66,803 75,567 75,248 99,188 139,419

Completions 51,568 54,588 63,777 68,865 53,904 59,080 98,457

Note: Workload is the sum of pending applications at the beginning of the fiscal year plus applications

received during the fiscal year.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of applications (in thousands)

Fiscal year

Pending plus applications received

Completions
Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major

Types of Applications

Page 73 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 22: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Immigrant Petitions for Alien

Worker (Form I-140)

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Officer workyears 10 11 13 14 13 17 22

Note: Data include adjudications officers’ overtime, but not the time they spent on administrative

activities (e.g., training or leave). According to an INS official, data do not always include time INS

officers, such as inspectors, were detailed to the Adjudications and Naturalization program because

INS does not consistently collect these data.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.

0

5

10

15

20

25

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of officer workyears

Fiscal year
Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major

Types of Applications

Page 74 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 23: Petition to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status (Form I-539) Workload

Compared to Completions

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Pending + applications received 252,330 219,859 244,304 255,860 294,498 455,048 567,807

Completions 249,003 212,485 235,417 233,725 227,355 306,969 383,302

Note: Workload is the sum of pending applications at the beginning of the fiscal year plus applications

received during the fiscal year.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of applications (in thousands)

Fiscal year

Pending plus applications received

Completions
Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major

Types of Applications

Page 75 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 24: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Petitions to Extend/Change

Nonimmigrant Status (Form I-539)

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Officer workyears 28 21 23 24 24 21 24

Note: Data include adjudications officers’ overtime, but not the time they spent on administrative

activities (e.g., training or leave). According to an INS official, data do not always include time INS

officers, such as inspectors, were detailed to the Adjudications and Naturalization program because

INS does not consistently collect these data.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of officer workyears

Fiscal year
Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major

Types of Applications

Page 76 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 25: Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence (Form I-751) Workload

Compared to Completions

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Pending + applications received 127,948 140,651 147,772 130,587 165,423 184,143 187,914

Completions 106,326 107,211 123,190 105,712 95,577 99,039 95,781

Note: Workload is the sum of pending applications at the beginning of the fiscal year plus applications

received during the fiscal year.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of applications (in thousands)

Fiscal year

Pending plus applications received

Completions
Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major

Types of Applications

Page 77 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 26: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Petitions to Remove Conditions on

Residence (Form I-751)

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Officer workyears 34 33 32 30 27 26 24

Note: Data include adjudications officers’ overtime, but not the time they spent on administrative

activities (e.g., training or leave). According to an INS official, data do not always include time INS

officers, such as inspectors, were detailed to the Adjudications and Naturalization program because

INS does not consistently collect these data.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of officer workyears

Fiscal year
Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major

Types of Applications

Page 78 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 27: Application for Employment Authorization (Form I-765) Workload

Compared to Completions

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Pending + applications received 767,483 909,126 1,022,937 1,237,354 1,346,866 1,472,042 1,637,419

Completions 680,214 847,040 938,887 1,105,542 1,228,401 1,257,754 1,391,625

Note: Workload is the sum of pending applications at the beginning of the fiscal year plus applications

received during the fiscal year.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of applications (in thousands)

Fiscal year

Pending plus applications received

Completions
Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major

Types of Applications

Page 79 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 28: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Applications for Employment

Authorization (Form I-765)

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Officer workyears 74 80 89 94 93 95 97

Note: Data include adjudications officers’ overtime, but not the time they spent on administrative

activities (e.g., training or leave). According to an INS official, data do not always include time INS

officers, such as inspectors, were detailed to the Adjudications and Naturalization program because

INS does not consistently collect these data.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of officer workyears

Fiscal year
Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field

Offices Visited

Page 80 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Table 9: California Service Center

Applications Received

Fiscal year

Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400)a 0 0 140,982 226,021 210,924 274,568 136,789

Application for adjustment of status (I-485)b 918 23 1 20,327 19,298 13,882 26,850

Application to replace permanent resident card (I-90) 80,140 62,563 86,846 77,010 81,484 62,845 154,110

Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I-129) 67,285 62,394 60,737 62,348 73,165 112,752 167,815

Petition for alien relative (I-130) 187,709 172,043 171,516 207,868 203,394 124,352 156,258

Application for travel document (I-131) 0 0 0 3,776 10,128 12,707 23,165

Immigrant petition for alien worker (I-140)c11,935 12,206 14,074 16,208 14,370 22,190 25,174

Application to extend/change nonimmigrant status (I-539) 57,081 54,822 58,753 65,152 65,215 167,276 109,146

Petition to remove conditions on residence (I-751) 23,137 24,178 24,401 20,460 24,771 22,353 21,421

Application for employment authorization (I-765) 132,442 178,141 215,451 222,798 216,696 210,999 199,929

All other applications 19,123 27,340 30,026 55,257 41,105 61,026 59,180

Total 579,770 593,710 802,787 977,225 960,550 1,084,950 1,079,837

a

Service centers did not receive N-400 applications in fiscal years 1994 and 1995. In fiscal year 1996,

some N-400 applications started to be directly mailed to service centers for initial processing, then

sent to districts for adjudication. In fiscal years 1996 through 1998, N-400 applications received by

INS were not consistently recorded or processed at the service centers or districts, according to INS

officials. For fiscal years 1999 and 2000, all naturalization applications were received by the service

centers and then sent to districts for adjudication.

b

Service centers did not routinely process I-485 applications until fiscal year 1997.

c

Service centers did not begin to process I-140 applications until fiscal year 1997.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.

Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field

Offices Visited
Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field

Offices Visited

Page 81 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Applications Completeda

Fiscal year

Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400)b 000000 0

Application for adjustment of status (I-485)c2,920 163 1 5,405 12,400 3,387 15,895

Application to replace permanent resident card (I-90) 216,511 184,977 140,003 89,637 58,055 68,724 361,384

Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I-129) 76,316 66,878 67,337 55,800 71,133 114,203 159,469

Petition for alien relative (I-130) 196,645 173,191 174,564 196,743 137,373 80,333 97,400

Application for travel document (I-131) 0 0 0 3,459 7,528 9,224 16,251

Immigrant petition for alien worker (I-140)d 12,544 13,104 14,573 17,073 9,951 8,229 26,404

Application to extend/change nonimmigrant status (I-539) 57,577 62,513 58,848 60,777 42,421 85,747 102,312

Petition to remove conditions on residence (I-751) 21,137 16,988 23,696 16,011 11,566 9,143 23,535

Application for employment authorization (I-765) 113,782 176,283 205,274 239,612 198,145 164,224 182,410

All other applications 19,647 27,311 29,275 33,203 26,216 14,506 26,827

Total 717,079 721,408 713,571 717,720 574,788 557,720 1,011,887

a

Completed applications are the sum of approved and denied applications.

b

N-400 applications are completed by the districts.

c

Service centers did not routinely process I-485 applications until fiscal year 1997.

d

Service centers did not begin to process I-140 applications until fiscal year 1997.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.

Production Goals as of April 2000

Fiscal year

Type of application 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400) a22,000

Application for adjustment of status (I-485) a18,125

a

Production goals were not established for service centers in fiscal year 1999.

Source: INS.
Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field

Offices Visited

Page 82 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Backlog of Pending Applications at Year End

Fiscal year

Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400)a0 0 116,929 230,466 306,892 360,571 123,589

Application for adjustment of status (I-485)b168 0 0 15,129 14,580 23,354 21,940

Application to replace permanent resident card (I-90) 45,159 55,571 23,211 10,972 34,281 62,725 139,379

Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I-129) 1,272 3,761 4,434 11,652 16,857 17,209 27,554

Petition for alien relative (I-130) 15,827 37,581 42,125 52,592 118,090 166,217 204,507

Application for travel document(I-131) 0 0 0 362 3,233 6,446 6,476

Immigrant petition for alien worker (I-140)c1,034 2,783 3,597 2,971 7,815 21,987 19,845

Application to extend/change nonimmigrant status (I-539) 5,757 6,079 5,327 9,461 32,567 114,261 120,694

Petition to remove conditions on residence (I-751) 143 2,967 748 511 7,704 17,255 15,513

Application for employment authorization (I-765) 16,959 27,004 34,381 13,482 27,972 69,120 68,529

All other applications 86,319 135,746 230,752 347,598 569,991 859,145 748,026

Total 90,322 143,937 239,904 384,847 605,045 917,662 793,694

a

Service centers did not receive N-400 applications in fiscal years 1994 and 1995.

b

Service centers did not routinely process I-485 applications until fiscal year 1997.

c

Service centers did not begin to process I-140 applications until fiscal year 1997.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.

Officer Workyears Spent Processing Applicationsa

Fiscal year

Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400)b0 0 1.3 4.2 10.7 14.1 16.7

Application for adjustment of status (I-485)c2.1 0.2 0 2.3 3.2 2.6 6.0

Application to replace permanent resident card (I-90) 10.3 17.3 14.3 13.4 6.3 5.6 19.5

Petition for non-immigrant worker (I-129) 9.9 11.6 11.1 13.0 13.0 19.1 16.6

Petition for alien relative (I-130) 15.7 14.3 19.8 20.3 16.8 9.8 9.9

Application for travel document (I-131) 0 0 0 0.5 1.0 2.6 3.3

Immigrant petition for alien worker (I-140)d5.0 3.6 4.6 4.7 4.1 5.8 9.9

Application to extend/change nonimmigrant status (I-539) 6.1 4.9 5.7 5.0 5.5 3.8 4.8

Petition to remove conditions on residence (I-751) 1.6 1.7 2.5 1.4 1.2 0.7 1.3

Application for employment authorization (I-765) 6.1 13.6 22.0 20.1 15.6 12.9 13.3

All other applications 12.9 7.0 14.2 14.3 6.8 4.6 3.9

Total 69.6 74.1 95.5 99.4 84.1 81.6 105.1

a

Includes adjudications officers’ overtime, but not officers’ administrative activities (such as training or

leave). Also does not always include INS officers, such as inspectors, detailed to the Adjudications

and Naturalization program because INS does not collect these data.

b

Service centers did not receive N-400 applications in fiscal years 1994 and 1995.

c

Service centers did not routinely process I-485 applications until fiscal year 1997.

d

Service centers did not begin to process I-140 applications until fiscal year 1997.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.
Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field

Offices Visited

Page 83 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Amount of Funds Spent on Overtime (in dollars)

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Amount expended $171,345 $473,571 $820,381 $755,620 $676,594 $420,891 $1,892,052

Source: INS.

Onboard Adjudications Staffa

Fiscal year

Type of position 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Permanent officerbN/A 116 106 103 111 108 114

Temporary officercN/A 0 0 0 0 0 1

Permanent clerical N/A 107 103 109 5 146 146

Temporary clericalcN/A 4 0 7 10 7 60

Contractor clerical N/A N/A 394 394 516 513 543

Total N/A 227 605 613 642 774 864

a

Staff onboard as of the end of each fiscal year.

b

Includes adjudications officers and supervisory adjudications officers.

c

Includes term (up to 4 years) appointments, rehired annuitants, and temporary (up to 2 years)

appointments. The majority of the temporary officers were assigned to districts.

Source: INS.

Date Applications Being Processed in September 2000 Were Received

Type of application Date received

Application for naturalization (N-400) a

Application for adjustment of status (I-485) July 1999

Application to replace permanent resident card (I-90) August 2000

Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I-129) September 2000

Petition for alien relative (I-130) August 2000

Application for travel document (I-131) September 2000

Immigrant petition for alien worker (I-140) July 2000

Application to extend/change nonimmigrant status (I-539) December 1999

Petition to remove conditions on residence (I-751) February 1999

Application for employment authorization (I-765) August 2000

a

Service centers do not adjudicate naturalization applications.

Source: INS.
Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field

Offices Visited

Page 84 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Estimated Processing Time Based on the Last 3 Months of FY 1996-2000 (in months)

Fiscal year

Type of application 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400) aaaaa

Application for adjustment of status (I-485) 0b21 11 173 7

a

Naturalization applications are completed at the districts and not at the service centers.

b

Service centers did not routinely process I-485 applications until fiscal year 1997.

Source: GAO analysis of INS data.
Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field

Offices Visited

Page 85 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Table 10: Vermont Service Center

Applications Received

Fiscal year

Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400)a0 0 156,737 211,221 207,752 203,186 145,033

Application for adjustment of status (I-485)b 11,806 11,969 13,482 41,040 43,428 41,394 46,742

Application to replace permanent resident card (I-90) 182,210 141,075 194,054 180,955 158,594 105,623 127,586

Petition for non-immigrant worker (I-129) 117,241 123,198 97,330 59,760 61,551 59,378 51,536

Petition for alien relative (I-130) 124,251 150,682 191,500 199,230 201,810 215,476 214,026

Application for travel document (I-131) 137,525 112,793 114,234 133,454 164,703 196,855 247,094

Immigrant petition for alien worker (I-140)c0 7 18 3,132 7,182 13,705 21,167

Application to extend/change nonimmigrant status

(I-539)

79,014 58,465 61,226 67,690 74,677 82,742 91,110

Petition to remove conditions on residence (I-751) 21,007 21,702 25,421 26,570 27,809 30,119 35,621

Application for employment authorization (I-765) 33,212 33,944 40,577 32,685 42,666 40,537 40,832

Total 730,027 673,080 916,952 992,781 1,029,510 1,041,592 1,041,592

a

Service centers did not receive N-400 applications in fiscal years 1994 and 1995. In fiscal year 1996,

some N-400 applications started to be directly mailed to service centers for initial processing, then

sent to districts for adjudication. In fiscal years 1996 through 1998, N-400 applications received by

INS were not consistently recorded or processed at the service centers or districts, according to INS

officials. For fiscal years 1999 and 2000, all naturalization applications were received by the service

centers and then sent to districts for adjudication.

b

The Vermont Service Center processed only the Baltimore District I-485 applications from fiscal

years 1994 through 1996. Service centers did not routinely process I-485 applications until fiscal year

1997.

c

Service centers did not begin to process I-140 applications until fiscal year 1997.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.
Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field

Offices Visited

Page 86 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Applications Completeda

Fiscal year

Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400)b0000000

Application for adjustment of status (I-485)c16,139 6,246 5,815 9,184 15,638 17,243 22,874

Application to replace permanent resident card (I-90) 135,716 164,965 214,856 212,768 141,775 90,193 50,279

Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I-129) 65,081 106,282 177,453 54,845 25,796 63,627 110,698

Petition for alien relative (I-130) 127,422 158,050 176,452 188,482 207,714 169,185 198,668

Application for travel document (I-131) 145,866 107,981 119,072 134,178 147,545 205,200 244,028

Immigrant petition for alien worker (I-140)d0 0 0 2,466 5,988 11,078 21,588

Application to extend/change nonimmigrant status

(I-539)

88,846 54,898 67,635 59,558 63,958 69,561 68,842

Petition to remove conditions on residence (I-751) 26,910 25,244 25,622 26,206 20,906 23,581 34,369

Application for employment authorization (I-765) 23,834 29,071 30,768 28,065 22,496 25,430 17,492

All other applications 629,814 652,737 817,673 715,752 651,816 675,098 768,838

Total 652,779 672,640 841,042 738,691 672,451 696,954 796,940

a

Completed applications are the sum of approved and denied applications.

b

N-400 applications are adjudicated by the districts.

c

Service centers did not routinely process I-485 applications until fiscal year 1997.

d

Service centers did not begin to process I-140 applications until fiscal year 1997.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.

Production Goals as of April 2000

Fiscal year

Type of application 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400) a22,000

Application for adjustment of status (I-485) a17,125

a

Production goals were not established for service centers in fiscal year 1999.

Source: INS.
Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field

Offices Visited

Page 87 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Backlog of Pending Applications at Year End

Fiscal year

Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400)a 0 0 100,326 210,540 341,428 288132 160,628

Application for adjustment of status (I-485)b2,491 31 19,248 33,398 39,357 45,366 32,882

Application to replace permanent resident card (I-90) 81,739 56,184 32,814 29,631 45,045 58,731 147,128

Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I-129) 64,887 81,438 267 10,376 47,399 42,960 18,011

Petition for alien relative (I-130) 13,792 4,082 13,632 18,384 3,083 41,087 43,296

Application for travel document (I-131) 7,140 11,669 6,341 5,461 21,949 13,067 25,046

Immigrant petition for alien worker (I-140)c0 3 7 273 1,063 3,320 1,477

Application to extend/change nonimmigrant status (I-539) 4,216 7,846 1,491 9,790 20,575 33,776 32,124

Petition to remove conditions on residence (I-751) 4,043 86 2 127 6,522 12,739 16,896

Application for employment authorization (I-765) 12,461 12,435 17,148 20,888 36,504 38,033 41,193

All other applications 5,179 2,910 2,144 9,052 16,148 38,381 10,192

Total 195,948 176,684 174,214 334,193 575,954 621,554 555,071

a

Service centers did not receive N-400 applications in fiscal years 1994 and 1995.

b

Service centers did not routinely process I-485 applications until fiscal year 1997.

c

Service centers did not begin to process I-140 applications until fiscal year 1997.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.

Officer Workyears Spent Processing Applications

Fiscal year

Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400)b0 0 5.7 0 5.3 1.7 20.1

Application for adjustment of status (I-485)c2.4 1.6 1.3 2.5 3.2 4.2 5.5

Application to replace permanent resident card (I-90) 7.5 12.0 16.3 6.7 2.2 6.4 11.2

Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I-129) 16.4 12.0 16.3 6.7 2.2 6.4 11.2

Petition for alien relative (I-130) 15.1 18.3 21.1 23.8 12.5 9.6 5.9

Application for travel document (I-131) 0 0 0 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.3

Immigrant petition for alien worker (I-140)d2.9 2.8 2.5 3.0 2.9 3.8 4.8

Application to extend/change nonimmigrant status (I-539) 10.0 6.0 6.2 6.7 6.9 3.3 3.8

Petition to remove conditions on residence (I-751) 2.5 3.7 3.4 3.2 1.5 2.2 1.9

Application for employment authorization (I-765) 14.6 17.8 17.1 21.4 21.9 21.4 24.2

All other applications 3.0 2.6 2.4 3.2 3.6 4.2 12.8

Total 74.4 76.8 87.3 85.8 76.1 82.9 121.7

a

Includes adjudications officers’ overtime, but not officers’ administrative activities (such as training or

leave). Also, does not always include INS officers, such as inspectors, detailed to the Adjudications

and Naturalization program because INS does not collect these data.

b

Service centers did not receive N-400 applications in fiscal years 1994 and 1995.

c

Service centers did not routinely process I-485 applications until fiscal year 1997.

d

Service centers did not begin to process I-140 applications until fiscal year 1997. INS officials told us

that officer time in fiscal years 1994 through 1996 were an anomaly.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.
Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field

Offices Visited

Page 88 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Amount of Funds Spent on Overtime (in dollars)

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Amount expended $192,780 $422,711 $412,497 $255,725 $484,414 $554,014 $1,518,265

Source: INS.

Onboard Adjudications Staffa

Fiscal year

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Type of position

Permanent officerbN/A 128 133 133 140 153 150

Temporary officercN/A 0 0 0 0 0 3

Permanent clerical N/A 107 108 107 113 141 137

Temporary clericalcN/A 4 9 15 11 6 8

Contractor clerical N/A N/A 295 301 234 462 447

Total N/A 239 545 556 498 762 745

a

Staff onboard as of the end of each fiscal year.

b

Includes adjudications officers and supervisory adjudications officers.

c

Includes term (up to 4 years) appointments, rehired annuitants, and temporary (up to 2 years)

appointments. The majority of the temporary officers were assigned to districts.

Source: INS.

Date Applications Being Processed in September 2000 Were Received

Type of application Date received

Application for naturalization (N-400) a

Application for adjustment of status (I-485) August 1999

Application to replace permanent resident card (I-90) September 2000

Petition for non-immigrant worker (I-129) August 2000

Petition for alien relative (I-90) April 2000

Application for travel document (I-131) September 2000

Immigrant petition for alien worker (I-140) July 2000

Application to extend/change nonimmigrant status (I-539) August 2000

Petition to remove conditions on residence (I-751) January 2000

Application for employment authorization (I-765) September 2000

a

Service centers do not adjudicate naturalization applications.

Source: INS.
Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field

Offices Visited

Page 89 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Estimated Processing Time Based on the Last 3 Months of FY 1996 -2000 (in months)

Fiscal year

Type of application 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400) aaaaa

Application for adjustment of status (I-485) 0b 10 31 133 15

a

N-400 applications are completed at the districts and not at the service centers.

b

Service centers did not routinely process I-485 applications until fiscal year 1997.

Source: GAO analysis of INS data.
Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field

Offices Visited

Page 90 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Table 11: Chicago District

Applications Received

Fiscal year

Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400)a21,561 54,258 35,469 5,183 1,241 0 0

Application for adjustment of status (I-485)b 13,090 24,951 44,963 42,506 25,476 25,128 16,563

Application to replace permanent resident card (I-90) 12,530 7,954 9,921 7,394 7,456 10,109 31,649

Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I-129)c 3 0 0 3 00 0

Petition for alien relative (I-130) 4,966 5,077 6,477 10,500 10,134 7,497 13,480

Application for travel document (I-131) 2,432 2,863 5,426 10,376 13,911 9,563 7,943

Immigrant petition for alien worker (I-140)c2 0 2 0 00 0

Application to extend/change nonimmigrant status (I-539) 257 173 349 295 166 264 538

Petition to remove conditions on residence (I-751) 60 39 47 962 1,672 415 37

Application for employment authorization (I-765) 15,544 22,146 20,225 34,980 37,486 37,079 32,853

All other applications 7,667 8,794 9,356 15,934 7,869 8,220 9,244

Total 78,112 126,255 132,235 128,133 105,411 98,275 112,307

a

Districts received and completed N-400 applications in fiscal years 1994 and 1995. In fiscal year

1996, some N-400 applications started to be directly mailed to service centers for initial processing,

then sent to districts for adjudication. In fiscal years 1996 through 1998, N-400 applications received

by INS were not consistently recorded or processed at the service centers or districts, according to

INS officials. For fiscal years 1999 and 2000, all naturalization applications were received by the

service centers and then sent to districts for adjudication.

b

From fiscal years 1994 through 1996, most I-485 applications were received and processed in the

districts. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, some types of I-485 applications were sent directly to service

centers for processing.

c

Districts did not routinely receive or process these petitions. They were sent to service centers for

processing.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.
Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field

Offices Visited

Page 91 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Applications Completeda

Fiscal year

Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400) 22,493 24,803 67,173 43,437 30,234 62,716 70,021

Application for adjustment of status (I-485)b16,478 21,178 32,064 31,420 20,801 20,430 20,074

Application to replace permanent resident card (I-90) 15 4 7 3,973 6,729 4,348 0

Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I-129)c30 0 2 0 0 0

Petition for alien relative (I-130) 5,098 3,752 6,184 9,227 8,949 7,169 3,388

Application for travel document (I-131) 2,367 3,042 5,417 9,917 14,188 9,446 7,229

Immigrant petition for alien worker (I-140)c20 2 0 0 0 0

Application to extend/change nonimmigrant status (I-539) 207 428 513 1,004 1,065 1,076 1,210

Petition to remove conditions on residence (I-751) 2,596 2,810 3,381 2,517 2,231 2,639 1,622

Application for employment authorization (I-765) 14,574 20,713 19,578 34,018 37,257 37,524 31,712

All other applications 3,937 4,158 3,869 11,177 5,907 6,010 11,283

Total 67,770 80,888 138,188 146,692 127,361 151,358 146,539

a

Completed applications are the sum of approved and denied applications.

b

From fiscal years 1994 through 1996, most I-485 applications were received and processed in the

districts. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, some types of I-485 applications were sent directly to service

centers for processing.

c

Districts did not routinely receive or process these applications. They were sent to service centers for

processing.

Source: INS.

Production Goals

Fiscal year

Type of application 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400) 58,991 62,157

Application for adjustment of status (I-485) a18,954

a

INS did not establish production goals for I-485 applications in fiscal year 1999.

Source: INS.
Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field

Offices Visited

Page 92 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Backlog of Pending Applications at Year End

Fiscal year

Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400) 10,665 40,744 21,576 25,895 26,464 17,071 24,530

Application for adjustment of status (I-485)a2,858 6,526 19,248 33,398 39,357 45,366 32,882

Application to replace permanent resident card (I-90) 0 0 0 588 517 0 835

Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I-129)b0 0 0 0 0 0 26

Petition for alien relative (I-130) 781 2,352 2,937 2,517 3,348 3,581 13,746

Application for travel document (I-131) 59 0 0 419 0 22 64

Immigrant petition for alien worker (I-140)b101000 9

Application to extend/change nonimmigrant status (I-539) 0 0 3 0 0 0 7

Petition to remove conditions on residence (I-751) 73 99 99 79 254 581 918

Application for employment authorization (I-765) 25 24 255 795 3,885 3,407 3,714

All other applications 1,594 1,590 1,855 6,012 7,539 10,045 7,723

Total 16,056 51,335 45,974 69,703 81,364 80,073 84,454

a

From fiscal years 1994 through 1996, most I-485 applications were received and processed in the

districts. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, some types of I-485 applications were sent directly to service

centers for processing and adjudication.

b

Districts did not routinely receive or process these petitions. They were sent to service centers for

processing.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.

Officer Workyears Spent Processing Applicationsa

Fiscal year

Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400) 9.6 10.9 30.0 37.6 19.9 33.7 39.2

Application for adjustment of status (I-485)b6.4 6.6 13.5 19.1 16.2 9.4 11.3

Application to replace permanent resident card (I-90) ddd 1.1 3.0 1.3 0.9

Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I-129)c d0 0 d000

Petition for alien relative (I-130) 2.1 1.9 2.1 4.0 3.7 4.5 1.6

Application for travel document (I-131) 0.2 0.2 0.3 2.9 4.9 2.6 1.4

Immigrant petition for alien worker (I-140)c d0 d d 000

Application to extend/change nonimmigrant status (I-539) 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2

Petition to remove conditions on residence (I-751) 1.1 1.0 1.1 0.9 1.1 1.1 0.7

Application for employment authorization (I-765) 1.5 1.5 1.3 0.7 1.9 2.3 2.5

All other applications 3.7 3.0 3.3 6.5 4.1 4.3 6.1

Total 24.7 25.2 51.8 73.1 55.0 59.4 63.8

a

Includes adjudications officers’ overtime, but not officers’ administrative activities (such as training or

leave). Also does not include INS officers, such as inspectors, detailed to the Adjudications and

Naturalization program because INS does not collect these data.

b

From fiscal years 1994 through 1996, most I-485 applications were received and processed in the

districts. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, some types of I-485 applications were sent directly to service

centers for processing.

c

Districts did not routinely process these petitions. They were sent to service centers for processing.

d

Less than 20 officer hours.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.
Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field

Offices Visited

Page 93 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Amount of Funds Spent on Overtime (in dollars)

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Amount expended $34,125 $106,377 $383,211 $303,269 $350,334 $345,035 $309,778

Source: INS.

Onboard Adjudications Staffa

Fiscal year

Type of position 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Permanent officerbN/A 39 48 43 47 62 67

Temporary officercN/A 0 38 28 25 33 29

Permanent clerical N/A 21 22 22 21 21 18

Temporary clericalcN/A 1 29 24 24 19 20

Contractor clerical N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 14 17

Total N/A 61 137 117 117 149 151

a

Staff onboard as of the end of each fiscal year.

b

Includes adjudications officers and supervisory adjudications officers.

c

Includes term (up to 4 years) appointments, rehired annuitants, and temporary (up to 2 years)

appointments.

Source: INS.

Number of Pending Naturalization Cases Submitted Before July 1998

Type of application As of September 27, 2000 As of December 1, 2000 As of March 1 , 2001

Application for naturalization (N-400) 7,653 6,961 4,560

Source: INS.

Age of Cases Being Processed in September 2000

Type of application Months

Application for naturalization (N-400) 15

Application for adjustment of status (I-485) 24

Application for travel document (I-131) 1

Petition to classify orphan as an immediate relaitve (I-600 and I-600A) a

Application for employment authorization (I-765) 2

Application for certification of citizenship (N-600) 27

Note: Includes cases processed by the district office and does not include cases processed by the

suboffices.

a

The Chicago District Office does not process I-600 petitions.

Source: INS.
Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field

Offices Visited

Page 94 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Estimated Processing Time Based on the Last 3 Months of FY1996-2000 (in months)

Fiscal year

Type of application 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400) 2 11 7 3 3

Application for adjustment of status (I-485) 5 13 22 25 17

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.
Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field

Offices Visited

Page 95 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Table 12: Houston District

Applications Received

Fiscal year

Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400)a15,523 31,142 30,413 21,350 47,585 0 7

Application for adjustment of status (I-485)b 8,193 15,564 18,582 23,525 12,052 9,340 9,713

Application to replace permanent resident card (I-90) 1,382 6 557 135 2 34 21,965

Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I-129)c 40 0 49 4 0 0 1

Petition for alien relative (I-130) 3,013 4,163 7,099 13,757 5,978 3,289 4,345

Application for travel document (I-131) 1,977 1,365 7,769 18,035 15,571 18,052 15,308

Immigrant petition for alien worker (I-140)c186 27 0 19 3 0 14

Application to extend/change nonimmigrant status (I-539) 540 384 137 209 190 157 75

Petition to remove conditions on residence (I-751) 1,050 913 656 716 1,163 759 566

Application for employment authorization (I-765) 4,103 2,292 9,240 18,711 21,380 21,323 23,060

All other applications 1,898 1,385 1,567 7,662 5,902 4,925 4,063

Total 37,905 57,241 76,069 104,123 109,826 57,879 79,117

a

Districts received and completed N-400 applications in fiscal years 1994 and 1995. In fiscal year

1996, some N-400 applications started to be directly mailed to service centers for initial processing,

then sent to districts for adjudication. In fiscal years 1996 through 1998, N-400 applications received

by INS were not consistently recorded or processed at the service centers or districts, according to

INS officials. For fiscal years 1999 and 2000, all naturalization applications were received by the

service centers and then sent to districts for adjudication.

b

From fiscal years 1994 through 1996, most I-485 applications were received and processed in the

districts. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, some types of I-485 applications were sent directly to service

centers for processing.

c

Districts did not routinely receive or process these petitions. They were sent to service centers for

processing.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.
Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field

Offices Visited

Page 96 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Applications Completeda

Fiscal year

Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400) 10,243 14,772 32,512 18,372 10,760 33,546 39,202

Application for adjustment of status (I-485)b7,578 5,468 11,099 10,875 4,944 6,533 6,738

Application to replace permanent resident card (I-90) 1381 21 557 132 2 16 5

Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I-129)c40 0 36 4 0 0 0

Petition for alien relative (I-130) 2739 1668 2579 3090 2039 3281 3077

Application for travel document (I-131) 1956 1362 7766 18034 15532 18077 12696

Immigrant petition for alien worker (I-140)c156 27 0 15 21 0 1

Application to extend/change nonimmigrant status (I-539) 543 384 144 209 190 157 75

Petition to remove conditions on residence (I-751) 839 866 962 676 604 747 315

Application for employment authorization (I-765) 5527 3039 9565 14204 22593 26826 20727

All other applications 1,668 916 703 7,426 5,236 4,900 4,205

Total 32,670 28,523 65,923 73,037 61,921 94,083 87,041

a

Completed applications are the sum of approved and denied applications.

b

From fiscal years 1994 through 1996, most I-485 applications were received and processed in the

districts. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, some types of I-485 applications were sent directly to service

centers for processing.

c

Districts did not routinely receive or process these petitions. They were sent to service centers for

processing.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.

Production Goals

Fiscal year

Type of application 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400) 29,740 36,726

Application for adjustment of status (I-485) a6,497

a

INS did not establish production goals for I-485 applications in fiscal year 1999.

Source: INS.
Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field

Offices Visited

Page 97 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Backlog of Pending Applications at Year End

Fiscal year

Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400) 8,536 22,807 20,014 24,345 61,770 32,904 19,836

Application for adjustment of status (I-485)a2,629 12,724 19,718 32,368 39,498 42,383 43,027

Application to replace permanent resident card (I-90) 15 0 0 3 3 5 6,871

Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I-129)b0 0 13 13 13 13 2

Petition for alien relative (I-130) 1,241 3,877 8,188 18,939 23,009 22,995 20,618

Application for travel document (I-131) 0 3 0 1 40 10 1,235

Immigrant petition for alien worker (I-140)b18 18 18 22 4 4 17

Application to extend/change nonimmigrant status (I-539) 7 7 0 0 0 0 4

Petition to remove conditions on residence (I-751) 408 455 0 85 644 648 201

Application for employment authorization (I-765) 747 0 0 4,507 3,294 1,791 2,136

All other applications 750 1,059 1,914 2,223 2,893 2,921 2,428

Total 14,351 40,950 49,865 82,506 131,168 103,674 96,375

a

From fiscal years 1994 through 1996, most I-485 applications were received and processed in the

districts. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, some types of I-485 applications were sent directly to service

centers for processing.

b

Districts did not routinely receive or process these petitions. They were sent to service centers for

processing.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.
Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field

Offices Visited

Page 98 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Officer Workyears Spent Processing Applicationsa

Fiscal year

Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400) 4.0 4.1 5.8 8.3 7.3 13.6 19.5

Application for adjustment of status (I-485)b2.9 2.1 3.4 4.2 3.2 2.5 2.5

Application to replace permanent resident card (I-90) 0.2 d 0.1 0.1 d d 1.6

Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I-129)c d0 ddd 0 0

Petition for alien relative (I-130) 1.2 0.7 1.1 1.4 1.5 1.9 1.6

Application for travel document (I-131) 0.7 0.5 0.6 0.9 2.2 1.5 1.4

Immigrant petition for alien worker (I-140) c 0.1 dddd 0 d

Application to extend/change nonimmigrant status (I-539) 0.1 0.1 d0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

Petition to remove conditions on residence (I-751) 0.4 0.3 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.2

Application for employment authorization (I-765) 1.4 0.7 1.0 0.7 0.5 1.2 1.5

All other applications 3.4 2.4 1.8 1.6 1.1 1.0 1.3

Total 14.3 11.0 14.5 17.6 16.5 22.1 29.7

a

Includes adjudications officers’ overtime, but not officers’ administrative activities (such as training or

leave). Also does not always include INS officers, such as inspectors, detailed to the Adjudications

and Naturalization program because INS does not collect these data.

b

From fiscal years 1994 through 1996, most I-485 applications were received and processed in the

districts. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, some types of I-485 applications were sent directly to service

centers for processing.

c

Districts did not routinely receive or process these petitions. They were sent to service centers for

processing.

d

Less than 20 officer hours.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.

Amount of Funds Spent on Overtime (in dollars)

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Amount expended $36,172 $139,878 $321,968 $334,670 $311,121 $238,779 $398,565

Source: INS.
Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field

Offices Visited

Page 99 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Onboard Adjudications Staffa

Fiscal year

Type of position 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Permanent officerb N/A 28 28 28 36 37 41

Temporary officercN/A 0 7 7 9 15 9

Permanent clerical N/A 10 10 10 14 15 15

Temporary clericalcN/A 1 18 12 1 5 4

Contractor clerical N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 8 11

Total N/A 39 63 57 60 80 80

a

Staff onboard as of the end of each fiscal year.

b

Includes adjudications officers and supervisory adjudications officers.

c

Includes term (up to 4 years) appointments, rehired annuitants, and temporary (up to 2 years)

appointments.

Source: INS.

Number of Pending Naturalization Cases Submitted Before July 1998

Type of application As of September 27,2000 As of December 1, 2000 As of March 1, 2001

Application for naturalization (N-400) 11,000 5,023 3,470

Source: INS.

Age of Cases Being Processed in September 2000

Type of application Months

Application for naturalization (N-400) 14

Application for adjustment of status (I-485) 30

Application for travel document (I-131) 1

Petition to classify orphan as an immediate relative (I-600 and I-600A) 4

Application for employment authorization (I-765) 3

Application for certification of citizenship (N-600) 12

Source: INS.

Estimated Processing Time Based on the Last 3 Months of FY 1996-2000 (in months)

Fiscal year

Type of application 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400) 4 45 77 7 4

Application for adjustment of status (I-485) 26 185 145 93 52

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.
Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field

Offices Visited

Page 100 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Table 13: Los Angeles District

Applications Received

Fiscal year

Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400)a115,055 253,523 125,911 111,169 36,544 63 17

Application for adjustment of status (I-485)b 30,683 91,394 79,205 76,097 67,329 26,924 48,706

Application to replace permanent resident card (I-90) 0 0 0 3,326 9 34,128 116,988

Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I-129)c 0 0 1 0 0 0 82

Petition for alien relative (I-130) 8,037 11,672 11,464 28,421 22,360 7,706 20,318

Application for travel document (I-131) 19,025 11,172 26,170 25,324 16,992 25,240 20,711

Immigrant petition for alien worker (I-140)c0 0 78 75 2 0 222

Application to extend/change nonimmigrant status (I-539) 1,292 653 647 91 0 1,308 2,529

Petition to remove conditions on residence (I-751) 25 211 57 888 19 291 690

Application for employment authorization (I-765) 35,018 15,461 10,706 72,740 77,015 147,120 144,780

All other applications 8,086 7,382 9,854 18,967 11,172 16,556 17,549

Total 217,221 391,468 264,093 337,098 231,442 259,336 372,592

a

Districts received and completed N-400 applications in fiscal years 1994 and 1995. In fiscal year

1996, some N-400 applications started to be directly mailed to service centers for initial processing,

then sent to districts for adjudication. In fiscal years 1996 through 1998, N-400 applications received

by INS were not consistently recorded or processed at the service centers or districts, according to

INS officials. For fiscal years 1999 and 2000, all naturalization applications were received by the

service centers and then sent to districts for adjudication.

b

From fiscal years 1994 through 1996, most I-485 applications were received and processed in the

districts. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, some types of I-485 applications were sent directly to service

centers for processing.

c

Districts did not routinely receive or process these petitions. They were sent to service centers for

processing.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.
Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field

Offices Visited

Page 101 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Applications Completeda

Fiscal year

Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400) 65,712 91,048 353,585 133,518 109,461 301,318 278,112

Application for adjustment of status (I-485)b36,081 40,232 48,492 48,373 52,588 42,713 81,176

Application to replace permanent resident card (I-90) 9 1 55 1,653 426 420 1,982

Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I-129)c0 0 0 0 0 0 73

Petition for alien relative (I-130) 10,593 11,187 11,533 12,445 15,308 11,740 16,619

Application for travel document (I-131) 18,481 10,395 26,460 34,859 33,754 24,806 17,086

Immigrant petition for alien worker (I-140)c0 8 92 65 9 0 11

Application to extend/change nonimmigrant status (I-539) 1,033 570 631 672 752 2,015 2,516

Petition to remove conditions on residence (I-751) 3,346 3,039 3,316 2,079 1,979 2,087 869

Application for employment authorization (I-765) 33,069 12,149 9,680 40,914 93,554 147,634 129,912

All other applications 8,133 8,338 8,770 14,131 9,118 10,818 14,520

Total 176,457 176,967 462,614 288,709 316,949 543,551 542,876

a

Completed applications are the sum of approved and denied applications.

b

From fiscal years 1994 through 1996, most I-485 applications were received and processed in the

districts. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, some types of I-485 applications were sent directly to service

centers for processing.

c

Districts did not routinely receive or process these petitions. They were sent to service centers for

processing.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.

Production Goals

Fiscal year

Type of application 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400) 258,000 261,542

Application for adjustment of status (I-485) a83,002

a

INS did not establish production goals for I-485 applications in fiscal year 1999.

Source: INS.
Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field

Offices Visited

Page 102 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Application Backlog Pending at the End of the Year

Fiscal year

Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400) 78,972 221,962 21,070 152,473 212,835 74,366 75,706

Application for adjustment of status (I-485)a25,611 70,467 98,049 125,727 143,403 122,314 123,800

Application to replace permanent resident card (I-90) 1 3 3 4,157 4,460 4,895 1,750

Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I-129)b0 0 0 0 0 0 38

Petition for alien relative (I-130) 7,411 7,850 9,465 27,156 36,066 32,808 33,130

Application for travel document (I-131) 43 535 124 4,346 4,929 5,330 2,848

Immigrant petition for alien worker (I-140)b0 1 24 77 62 62 35

Application to extend/change nonimmigrant status (I-539) 28 10 10 10 12 12 141

Petition to remove conditions on residence (I-751) 1,542 1,274 940 490 992 886 2,760

Application for employment authorization (I-765) 168 31 1,366 48,838 27,821 1,562 5,685

All other applications 2,802 1,677 2,032 3,891 10,295 14,236 25,556

Total 116,578 303,810 133,083 367,165 440,875 256,471 271,449

a

From fiscal years 1994 through 1996, most I-485 applications were received and processed in the

districts. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, some types of I-485 applications were sent directly to service

centers for processing and adjudication.

b

Districts did not routinely receive or process these petitions. They were sent to service centers for

processing.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.
Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field

Offices Visited

Page 103 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Officer Workyears Spent Processing Applicationsa

Fiscal year

Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400) 18.5 27.0 72.3 61.3 94.0 149.8 112.6

Application for adjustment of status (I-485)b11.2 14.3 21.3 63.4 67.1 48.9 39.7

Application to replace permanent resident card (I-90) d0 d0.7 0.7 9.5 5.1

Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I-129)c0 0.3 d d 000

Petition for alien relative (I-130) 5.1 5.9 5.7 7.6 8.1 5.2 5.2

Application for travel document (I-131) 3.1 1.6 2.0 2.5 2.8 2.8 2.5

Immigrant petition for alien worker (I-140)c0 d0.4 0.1 d0 d

Application to extend/change nonimmigrant status (I-539) 0.5 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.9 0.8 0.8

Petition to remove conditions on residence (I-751) 4.0 4.1 3.2 1.9 2.0 1.8 0.8

Application for employment authorization (I-765) 6.0 1.0 1.1 1.5 2.5 5.0 1.4

All other applications 16.1 14.6 14.0 11.5 5.7 6.1 8.7

Total 64.5 68.9 120.4 151.1 183.8 229.8 176.7

a

Includes adjudications officers’ overtime, but not officers’ administrative activities (such as training or

leave). Also does not always include INS officers, such as inspectors, detailed to the Adjudications

and Naturalization program because INS does not collect these data.

b

From fiscal years 1994 through 1996, most I-485 applications were received and processed in the

districts. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, some types of I-485 applications were sent directly to service

centers for processing.

c

Districts did not routinely receive or process these petitions. They were sent to service centers for

processing.

d

Less than 20 officer hours.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.

Amount of Funds Spent on Overtime (in dollars)

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Amount expended $114,767 $724,829 $2,340,033 $1,696,140 $2,219,541 $1,831,409 $2,452,838

Source: INS.
Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field

Offices Visited

Page 104 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Onboard Adjudications Staffa

Fiscal year

Type of position 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Permanent officerb N/A 126 158 170 202 206 234

Temporary officercN/A 0 132 108 113 135 95

Permanent clerical N/A 128 118 122 123 123 118

Temporary clericalcN/A 12 121 128 133 129 106

Contractor clerical N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 75 64

Total N/A 266 529 528 571 668 617

a

Staff onboard as of the end of each fiscal year.

b

Includes adjudications officers and supervisory adjudications officers.

c

Includes term (up to 4 years) appointments, rehired annuitants, and temporary (up to 2 years)

appointments. The majority of the temporary officers were assigned to districts.

Number of Pending Naturalization Cases Submitted Before July 1998

As of September 27, 2000 As of December 1, 2000 As of March 1, 2001

Application for naturalization (N-400) 28,266 26,477 15,280

Source: INS.

Age of Cases Being Processed in September 2000

Type of application Months

Application for naturalization (N-400) 32

Application for adjustment of status (I-485) 36

Application for travel document (I-131) 2

Petition to classify orphan as an immediate relative (I-600 and I-600A) 14

Application for employment authorization (I-765) 3

Application for certification of citizenship (N-600) 24

Note: Includes cases processed by the district office and does not include cases processed by the

suboffices.

Source: INS.

Estimated Processing Time Based on the Last 3 Months of FY 1996-2000 (in months)

Fiscal year

Type of application 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400) 0 26 20 2 4

Application for adjustment of status (I-485) 18 27 39 45 15

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.
Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field

Offices Visited

Page 105 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Table 14: Miami District

Applications Received

Fiscal year

Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400)a38,351 55,675 66,168 85 0 0 0

Application for adjustment of status (I-485)b 25,250 45,580 36,036 56,492 33,869 16,273 21,448

Application to replace permanent resident card (I-90) 8,131 10,761 10,961 4,807 5,044 5,321 7,314

Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I-129)c 4 12 27 55 2 0 0

Petition for alien relative (I-130) 10,267 13,499 16,915 27,838 21,636 11,267 9,541

Application for travel document (I-131) 2,409 1,672 3,554 7,890 9,324 8,332 9,474

Immigrant petition for alien worker (I-140)c101 199 16 0 0 0 0

Application to extend/change nonimmigrant status (I-539) 465 778 823 704 471 531 400

Petition to remove conditions on residence (I-751) 2,539 2,930 910 227 77 68 51

Application for employment authorization (I-765) 44,655 51,219 48,878 61,882 52,599 58,750 68,538

All other applications 2,816 3,768 14,125 8,251 8,423 13,780 13,227

Total 134,988 186,093 198,413 168,231 131,445 114,322 129,993

a

Districts received and completed N-400 applications in fiscal years 1994 and 1995. In fiscal year

1996, some N-400 applications started to be directly mailed to service centers for initial processing,

then sent to districts for adjudication. In fiscal years 1996 through 1998, N-400 applications received

by INS were not consistently recorded or processed at the service centers or districts, according to

INS officials. For fiscal years 1999 and 2000, all naturalization applications were received by the

service centers and then sent to districts for adjudication.

b

From fiscal years 1994 through 1996, most I-485 applications were received and processed in the

districts. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, some types of I-485 applications were sent directly to service

centers for processing.

c

Districts did not routinely receive or process these petitions. They were sent to service centers for

processing.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.
Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field

Offices Visited

Page 106 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Applications Completed

Fiscal year

Type of applicationa1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400) 42,195 28,125 159,255 33,515 51,694 142,276 109,166

Application for adjustment of status (I-485)b23,080 29,475 44,633 43,302 34,955 20,217 58,795

Application to replace permanent resident card (I-90) 103 70 687 154 13 0 13

Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I-129)c 0 0 3 41 3 0 0

Petition for alien relative (I-130) 9,241 11,063 16,829 22,069 20,512 8,421 9,351

Application for travel document (I-131) 2,056 1,615 3,162 8,583 9,317 7,810 9,541

Immigrant petition for alien worker (I-140)c45 198 11 1 0 0 0

Application to extend/change nonimmigrant status (I-539) 434 722 820 750 546 542 334

Petition to remove conditions on residence (I-751) 3,930 4,270 5,593 3,937 4,921 4,014 4,373

Application for employment authorization (I-765) 45,712 54,397 43,652 63,363 52,811 62,686 71,193

All other applications 2,616 2,251 2,019 8,749 6,983 6,441 12,423

Total 129,412 132,186 276,664 184,464 181,755 252,407 275,189

a

Completed applications are the sum of approved and denied applications.

b

From fiscal years 1994 through 1996, most I-485 applications were received and processed in the

districts. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, some types of I-485 applications were sent directly to service

centers for processing.

c

Districts did not routinely receive or process these petitions. They were sent to service centers for

processing.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.

Production Goals

Fiscal year

Type of application 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400) 135,594 104,345

Application for adjustment of status (I-485) a59,906

a

INS did not establish production goals for I-485 applications in fiscal year 1999.

Source: INS.
Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field

Offices Visited

Page 107 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Backlog of Pending Applications at Year End

Fiscal year

Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400) 24,543 46,165 36,718 64,353 47,218 6,882 12,464

Application for adjustment of status (I-485)a11,351 15,933 31,628 44,138 43,621 41,777 22,234

Application to replace permanent resident card (I-90) 0 0 65 0 0 257 34

Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I-129)b000 0 000

Petition for alien relative (I-130) 4731 5511 5561 28605 30772 28300 8184

Application for travel document (I-131) 0 0 278 0 0 0 68

Immigrant petition for alien worker (I-140)b005 0 000

Application to extend/change nonimmigrant status (I-539) 26 44 117 81 41 66 111

Petition to remove conditions on residence (I-751) 304 945 0 431 422 792 2036

Application for employment authorization (I-765) 2621 2414 7197 1618 4479 2496 8484

All other applications 1,834 2,949 7,164 9,754 9,140 15,697 13,437

Total 45,410 73,961 88,733 148,980 135,693 96,267 67,052

a

From fiscal years 1994 through 1996, most I-485 applications were received and processed in the

districts. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, some types of I-485 applications were sent directly to service

centers for processing and adjudication.

b

Districts did not routinely receive or process these petitions. They were sent to service centers for

processing.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.
Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field

Offices Visited

Page 108 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Officer Workyears Spent Processing Applicationsa

Fiscal year

Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400) 12.8 10.7 40.9 50.6 53.9 73.5 58.3

Application for adjustment of status (I-485)b12.3 14.6 23.4 27.0 26.8 15.1 28.6

Application to replace permanent resident card (I-90) 0.3 0.5 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3

Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I-129)c d0 d d 000

Petition for alien relative (I-130) 5.2 5.6 5.9 7.9 9.2 5.6 7.0

Application for travel document (I-131) 0.8 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.9 1.4

Immigrant petition for alien worker (I-140)c0.1 dd d 000

Application to extend/change nonimmigrant status (I-539) 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.4 0.6 0.4

Petition to remove conditions on residence (I-751) 2.8 2.5 2.5 1.9 2.7 2.2 2.5

Application for employment authorization (I-765) 5.7 5.6 4.2 4.3 4.2 3.8 5.4

All other applications 7.1 4.8 3.9 7.3 6.6 8.7 5.3

Total 47.5 45.4 82.3 100.3 104.5 110.5 109.2

a

Includes adjudications officers’ overtime, but not officers’ administrative activities (such as training or

leave). Also does not always include INS officers, such as inspectors, detailed to the Adjudications

and Naturalization program because INS does not collect these data.

b

From fiscal years 1994 through 1996, most I-485 applications were received and processed in the

districts. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, some types of I-485 applications were sent directly to service

centers for processing.

c

Districts did not routinely receive or process these petitions. They were sent to service centers for

processing.

d

Less than 20 officer hours.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.

Amount of Funds Spent on Overtime (in dollars)

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Amount expended $105,950 $412,563 $1,134,627 $828,174 $867,978 $824,688 $1,252,932

Source: INS.
Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field

Offices Visited

Page 109 GAO-01-488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Onboard Adjudications Staffa

Fiscal year

Type of position 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Permanent officerbN/A 86 90 93 101 112 151

Temporary officercN/A 0 62 82 62 79 47

Permanent clerical N/A 49 50 44 53 51 50

Temporary clericalcN/A 14 71 79 44 20 20

Contractor clerical N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 44 45

Total N/A 149 273 298 260 306 313

a

Staff onboard as of the end of each fiscal year.

b

Includes adjudications officers and supervisory adjudications officers.

c

Includes term (up to 4 years) appointments, rehired annuitants, and temporary (up to 2 years)

appointments.

Source: INS.

Number of Pending Naturalization Cases Submitted Before July 1998

As of September 27, 2000 As of December 1, 2000 As of March 1, 2001

Application for naturalization (N-400) 20,556 10,178 5,087

Source: INS.

Age of Cases Being Processed in September 2000

Type of application Months

Application for naturalization (N-400) 18

Application for adjustment of status (I-485) 15

Application for travel document (I-131) 1

Petition to classify orphan as an immediate relative (I-600 and I-600A) 3

Application for employment authorization (I-765) 3

Application for certification of citizenship (N-600) 18

Note: Includes cases processed at the district office and does not include cases processed by the

suboffices.

Source: INS.

Estimated Processing Time Based on the Last 3 Months of FY 1996-2000 (in months)

Fiscal year

Type of application 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N-400) 2 25 6 0 1

Application for adjustment of status (I-485) 8 12 21 42 3

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.
Appendix VI: INS Valuation Study Results on

Pending Application Wait Times for Selected

Field Offices

Page 110 GAO-01-488 Factors Impeding Timeliness of Processing

Table 15: Valuation Study Results on Wait Times for Naturalization Applications (Form N-400)

Application

Field office

Number

pending

Number

sampled

Percentage submitted

before fee changea

Estimated applicants

waiting at least 21 monthsb

Service center

California 122,857 666 30 36,857

Nebraska 59,162 843 9 5,325

Texas 89,213 842 22 19,627

Vermont 172,159 1630 14 24,102

District

Los Angeles 75,628 1052 59 44,621

New York 40,418 538 92 37,185

Region

Central 78,506 546 64 50,244

Eastern 103,301 700 58 59,915

Western 76,484 817 68 52,009

Note: Results as of September 30, 2000.

a

Fee change was January 15, 1999.

b

The sampled population consists of 5 types of pending applications in 35 INS field offices that

comprise approximately 95-percent of the servicewide pending applications according to a July 14,

2000, inventory. INS designed each sample so that the margin of error for each estimate is within 5

percent at the 95-percent confidence level.

Source: INS.

Appendix VI: INS Valuation Study Results on

Pending Application Wait Times for Selected

Field Offices
Appendix VI: INS Valuation Study Results on

Pending Application Wait Times for Selected

Field Offices

Page 111 GAO-01-488 Factors Impeding Timeliness of Processing

Table 16: Valuation Study Results on Wait Times for Application for Adjustment of Status (Form I-485)

Application

Field office

Number

pending

Number

sampled

Percentage submitted

before fee changea

Estimated applicants

waiting at least 21 monthsb

Service center

California 21,940 154 14 3,072

Nebraska 199,958 2,598 2 3,999

Texas 89,979 512 28 25,194

Vermont 59,080 563 6 3,545

District

Los Angeles 123,815 1,544 39 48,288

New York 81,017 720 48 38,888

Region

Central 161,754 1,278 35 56,614

Eastern 141,904 1,059 34 48,247

Western 121,222 1,242 33 40,003

Note: Results as of September 30, 2000.

a

Fee change was October 13, 1998.

b

The sampled population consists of 5 types of pending applications in 35 INS field offices that

comprise approximately 95-percent of the servicewide pending applications according to a July 14,

2000, inventory. INS designed each sample so that the margin of error for each estimate is within 5

percent at the 95-percent confidence level.

Source: INS.

Table 17: Valuation Study Results on Wait Times for Application to Replace Permanent Resident Card (Form I-90)

Application

Field office

Number

pending

Number

sampled

Percentage

before fee changea

Estimated applicants

waiting at least 21 monthsb

Service center

California 138,832 741 0 0

Nebraska 40,812 341 0 0

Texas 15,649 224 22 3,443

Vermont 17,729 221 3 532

Note: Results as of September 30, 2000.

a

Fee change was October 13, 1998.

b

INS designed each sample so that the margin of error for each estimate is within 5 percent at the 95-

percent confidence level. INS sampled the application to replace alien registration card at the four

service centers only. Because INS did not sample pending applications in the districts, the number of

pending applications will be smaller than the number of pending applications in table 8.

Source: INS.
Appendix VI: INS Valuation Study Results on

Pending Application Wait Times for Selected

Field Offices

Page 112 GAO-01-488 Factors Impeding Timeliness of Processing

Table 18: Valuation Study Results on Wait Times for Petition for Alien Relative (Form I-130)

Application

Field office

Number

pending

Number

sampled

Percentage submitted

before fee changea

Estimated applicants

waiting at least 21 monthsb

Service center

California 202,313 589 28 56,648

Nebraska 62,376 921 0 0

Texas 122,848 1,037 6 7,371

Vermont 145,983 1,429 7 10,219

District

Los Angeles 33,140 509 28 9,279

New York 41,721 434 46 19,192

Region

Central 69,961 515 38 26,585

Eastern 67,257 449 29 19,505

Western 43,693 427 36 15,729

Note: Results as of September 30, 2000.

a

Fee change was October 13, 1998.

b

The sampled population consists of 5 types of pending applications in 35 INS field offices that

comprise approximately 95 percent of the servicewide pending applications according to a July 14,

2000, inventory. INS designed each sample so that the margin of error for each estimate is within 5

percent at the 95-percent confidence level.

Table 19: Valuation Study Results on Wait Time for Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status (Form I-539)

Application

Field office

Number

pending

Number

sampled

Percentage

before fee changea

Estimated applicants

waiting at least 21 monthsb

Service center

California 45,105 249 4 1,804

Nebraska 8,485 234 0 0

Texas 15,214 190 0 0

Vermont 32,124 271 0 0

Note: Results as of September 30, 2000.

a

Fee change was October 13, 1998.

b

INS designed each sample so that the margin of error for each estimate is within 5 percent at the 95-

percent confidence level. INS sampled the application to extend/change nonimmigrant status (Form I539) at the 4 service centers only. Because INS did not sample pending applications in the districts,

the number of pending applications will be smaller than the number of pending applications in table 8.

Source: INS.
Appendix VII: Comments From the Department of Justice

Page 113 GAO-01-488 Factors Impeding Timeliness of Processing

Appendix VII: Comments From the

Department of Justice
Appendix VIII: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments

Page 114 GAO-01-488 Factors Impeding Timeliness of Processing

Richard M. Stana (202) 512-8777

Evi L. Rezmovic (202) 512-8777

In addition to the above, Gretchen Bornhop, Nancy Kawahara, Jennifer

Kim, David Alexander, Ann H. Finley, and Jennifer Bryning made key

contributions to this report.

Appendix VIII: GAO Contacts and Staff

Acknowledgments

GAO Contacts

Acknowledgments

(183640)
The first copy of each GAO report is free. Additional copies of reports are

$2 each. A check or money order should be made out to the

Superintendent of Documents. VISA and MasterCard credit cards are also

accepted.

Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a single address are

discounted 25 percent.

Orders by mail:

U.S. General Accounting Office

P.O. Box 37050

Washington, DC 20013

Orders by visiting:

Room 1100

700 4th St., NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW)

Washington, DC 20013

Orders by phone:

(202) 512-6000

fax: (202) 512-6061

TDD (202) 512-2537

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and testimony. To

receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any list from the past 30 days,

please call (202) 512-6000 using a touchtone phone. A recorded menu will

provide information on how to obtain these lists.

Orders by Internet

For information on how to access GAO reports on the Internet, send an email message with “info” in the body to:

Info@www.gao.gov

or visit GAO’s World Wide Web home page at:

http://www.gao.gov

Contact one:

• Web site: http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

• E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

• 1-800-424-5454 (automated answering system)

Ordering Information

To Report Fraud,

Waste, and Abuse in

Federal Programs