PROPOSED REFUGEE ADMISSIONS

FOR

FISCAL YEAR 2017

REPORT TO THE CONGRESS

SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF

THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

TO THE

COMMITTEES ON THE JUDICIARY

UNITED STATES SENATE

AND

UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

IN FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF

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

OF THE

IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

 
i

INTRODUCTION

This Proposed Refugee Admissions for Fiscal Year 2017: Report to the 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

estimated cost of their movement and resettlement;

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

of their admission to the United States; 1

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

in the resettlement of such refugees;

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

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

States; and

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

members.

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

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

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

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

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

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

providing information about specific measures taken to facilitate access to the 

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

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

Section 402(b) of the IRFA.

 

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

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

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

FOREWORD

On the occasion of World Refugee Day, June 20, President Obama reaffirmed our nation’s commitment to helping refugees and our leading role in 

providing safe haven. This commitment comes in the midst of an unprecedented 

global migration and refugee crisis. There is currently a higher number of

refugees, asylum-seekers, and internally displaced persons – more than 65 million 

– than at any time on record. The United States leads the world in providing 

humanitarian aid to crises overseas and also accepts more refugees for 

resettlement through the United Nations refugee agency (UNHCR) than any other 

country.

While starting life anew in the United States may be daunting, it also offers 

hope and unparalleled opportunity. It is a chance not only to escape from violence 

and persecution but to make a fresh start. The assistance the American people 

provide helps newcomers find their footing and become a part of their new 

communities. Refugees are not the only ones who benefit; they add to America’s 

vitality and diversity and make substantial contributions to our economic and 

cultural life.

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

vulnerable refugees. As a matter of principle, the U.S. Refugee Admissions 

Program (USRAP) offers the possibility of resettlement to refugees regardless of 

their location, national origin, health status, occupational skills, or level of 

educational attainment.

U.S. Resettlement Program Growing

In FY 2016, the Administration aims to reach the ceiling of 85,000 refugee 

arrivals established by the President, and in FY 2017 will strive to admit 110,000 

refugees. This represents a 57 percent increase over a two-year period from the 

70,000 refugees admitted to the United States in 2015. In the current fiscal year, 

more refugees are likely to be resettled to the United States from the Near 

East/South Asia region than in any year on record, as well as more refugees from 

Africa than in any of the past dozen years. In order to achieve this, the 

Department of State and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) expanded 

operations in Jordan, Tanzania, and Uganda, interviewing nearly 25,000 refugee 

applicants. By co-locating and surging staff, the USRAP significantly reduced the 

time between certain steps in the process, including UNHCR referral, prescreening, DHS interview, and medical screening, and thus decreased overall 

processing time without curtailing the program’s robust security checks.
iii

Increasing the refugee admissions ceiling 

to 110,000 in FY 2017 will require cooperation 

among several U.S. government agencies, 

including close interagency coordination on 

security checks and other requirements. As a 

public-private partnership, the program also 

depends on the support of American nongovernmental organizations, charities, faithbased groups and thousands of volunteers and 

caring people in hundreds of communities 

across the country.

Leaders’ Summit on Refugees

On September 20, 2016, President 

Obama will host the Leaders’ Summit on 

Refugees at the United Nations for countries 

that have made new and significant 

commitments to increase international

humanitarian assistance; to create greater 

opportunities for legal resettlement or other 

legal pathways for admission to safe countries; 

and to enact policies that allow refugees to be 

self-reliant, including by increasing the 

number of refugees worldwide in school by one 

million, and the number of refugees granted the 

legal right to work by one million.

President Obama also launched a private 

sector Call to Action in advance of this year’s 

UN General Assembly to draw on the expertise, 

resources and entrepreneurial spirit of the 

private sector to help refugees. The Call to 

Action asks companies to make “new, 

measurable and significant commitments that 

will have a durable impact on refugees residing 

in countries on the frontlines of the global 

refugee crisis and in countries of resettlement, 

like the United States.” The Call to Action is 

focused on generating corporate commitments

“Today, on World Refugee Day, we 

recognize the challenges and hardships that 

refugees face, honor their courage and 

resilience in the face of overwhelming 

obstacles, and celebrate their many 

valuable contributions to our Nation.

This year’s commemoration comes as the 

UN High Commissioner for Refugees 

reports that more people are displaced by 

rising violence, insecurity, and persecution 

than at any time on record. More than 65 

million people around the world – more 

than the population of France, or California 

and Texas combined – have been driven 

from their homes. More than half are 

children. The scale of this human suffering 

is almost unimaginable; the need for the 

world to respond is beyond question.

Every day, members of the international 

community, humanitarian organizations, 

civil society, and individual citizens work 

to assist these vulnerable populations. For 

our part, the United States provides more 

humanitarian assistance to refugees than 

any other nation and maintains the world’s 

largest refugee resettlement program. We 

support programs that provide food, water, 

shelter, and medical care to refugees, and 

fight for their rights to safety, dignity and 

long-term livelihood opportunities.

Today, we commemorate the spirit and 

strength of refugees worldwide and the 

dedication of those who help them on and 

after their journeys. Protecting and 

assisting refugees is a part of our history as 

a Nation, and we will continue to alleviate 

the suffering of refugees abroad, and to 

welcome them here at home, because doing 

so reflects our American values and our 

noblest traditions as a Nation, enriches our 

society, and strengthens our collective 

security.”

President Barack Obama

June 20, 2016

In commemoration of World Refugee Day
iv

in three key areas: facilitating access to 

education; increasing employment

opportunities for refugees; and helping

refugees to get the resources they need to 

become self-reliant. Commitments can be 

directed towards refugees resettled in the 

United States or located anywhere in the world.

Syrian Resettlement on the Rise

The refugee crisis caused by the conflict 

in Syria is the worst the world has witnessed in 

a generation, generating more than 5 million 

refugees in the region. The U.S. government is 

deeply committed to assisting the Syrian 

people and has provided nearly $5.6 billion in 

humanitarian assistance since the start of the 

crisis, more than any other donor. While the 

vast majority of Syrians would prefer to return 

home when the conflict ends, it is clear that 

some remain extremely vulnerable in their 

countries of asylum and would benefit from 

resettlement. The United States will meet or 

exceed the goal of admitting 10,000 Syrian

refugees in FY 2016 and aims to admit a 

significantly higher number in FY 2017.

The United States is one of 32 countries 

that have agreed to accept referrals from 

UNHCR as part of its ambitious international 

effort to secure permanent or temporary 

resettlement for up to 10 percent of Syrian 

refugees. As of mid-2016, UNHCR has

secured commitments from these countries to 

admit more than 220,000 Syrians for 

permanent resettlement, humanitarian 

admission, private sponsorship, or academic 

scholarships.

“Today, we honor refugees’ resilience and 

courage. We also recognize the 

tremendous contributions made by local 

and international non-governmental 

organizations on the front lines of 

delivering life-saving assistance. This 

year’s commemoration comes at a time 

when brutal conflicts are forcing record 

numbers of innocent people to flee, and 

challenging the world to find better ways 

to protect them. The war in Syria alone 

has displaced more than 11 million people 

– half of that nation’s pre-war population. 

Millions more have fled Daesh’s atrocities 

in Iraq, civil wars in Yemen and South 

Sudan, political violence in Burundi, and 

Boko Haram’s rampages through Nigeria, 

Cameroon, Niger, and Chad.

The number of forcibly displaced people is 

the largest ever recorded. Sixty-five 

million people are refugees, internally 

displaced or seeking asylum, five million 

more than a year ago.

The refugees we welcome to the United 

States will join previous generations who 

have come to this country to escape 

violence and persecution – threats to 

human life and dignity that remain all too

real today. History celebrates such 

moments when we have overcome bias 

and fear, and opened our doors. Those 

who have walked through them have made 

immeasurable contributions to our 

community of citizens and enriched our 

lives. Their achievements are a testament 

to the potential all humans have to heal, to 

overcome loss, to start over, and to the 

obligation we share, to give future 

generations that chance.”

Secretary John Kerry

June 20, 2016

In commemoration of World Refugee Day
v

Protecting Vulnerable Children and Others in Central America

In December 2014, the Administration established an in-country refugee 

and parole program for children in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras. Under 

the initial program, lawfully present parents in the United States could file to 

bring their unmarried children under age 21 to join them in this country, and in 

certain circumstances, an in-country parent could be approved to travel with the 

approved child to the United States. In July 2016, the Administration announced 

an expansion of the program to include the following relatives, when 

accompanied by a child under age 21: sons and daughters age 21 and older and/or 

married, the biological parent of the child even if not married to the U.S.-based 

lawfully present parent, and certain caregivers who are also related to the U.S.-

based lawfully present parent. As of August 2016, parents have submitted more 

than 9,500 applications and more than 700 children have arrived to join parents in 

the United States. Thousands more will be joining parents in the coming months 

as an increasing number of interviews have been conducted and applications are 

being approved.

In July 2016, the Government of Costa Rica announced that it had entered 

into a protection transfer arrangement (PTA) with UNHCR and the International 

Organization for Migration to provide protection to vulnerable individuals and 

families from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras. Under the PTA, Costa 

Rica will serve as a temporary site to host Central Americans awaiting 

completion of their refugee application process and onward resettlement to the 

United States or another third country. For cases not requiring immediate transfer 

to Costa Rica, we have also moved to establish an in-country referral program for 

residents of El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras. Under this program, 

UNHCR will assist in identifying vulnerable individuals who will be considered 

for refugee protection in the United States after being screened and interviewed 

by the U.S. Government in their countries of origin.

Ensuring National Security in the Refugee Admissions Program and Combatting 

Fraud

The USRAP continues to employ rigorous security measures to protect 

against threats to our national security and is committed to deterring and detecting 

fraud among those seeking to resettle in the United States.

Refugees of every nationality are subject to the highest level of security 

checks for any category of traveler to the United States. This multi-step 

screening process includes intensive biographic and biometric screening 

involving multiple federal intelligence, security, and law enforcement agencies 

including the National Counterterrorism Center, the Federal Bureau of 
vi

Investigation, and the Departments of State, Defense, and Homeland Security. 

A step-by-step guide to the process is posted at the following link: 

https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2015/11/20/infographic-screening-processrefugee-entry-united-states.

The USRAP continues to work on an interagency basis not only to 

maintain the highest rigor in screening refugee applicants, but also continually to 

seek ways to strengthen existing procedures.

Sharing Best Practices on Resettlement and Integration

Beginning in mid-2015, interest in refugee resettlement in the United 

States, Canada, and Europe has surged. National and local resettlement agencies 

in the United States have reported receiving a remarkable number of offers of 

assistance including donations of household and personal goods, housing, and 

willingness to ‘sponsor’ or befriend refugees. At the same time, some elected 

officials have publicly stated their opposition to resettling certain refugees in their

states. These dynamics have sparked a debate about admitting refugees to this 

country and increased interest in learning more about the program in communities 

large and small throughout the country. 

The White House Task Force on New Americans was established by 

President Obama in November 2014 to strengthen integration efforts nationwide 

and build welcoming communities for all immigrants, including refugees. As 

stated in the preamble to the one-year progress report, this interagency effort was 

launched “to develop a coordinated federal strategy to better integrate new 

Americans into communities and support state and local efforts to do the same.” 

Sixteen core goals and 48 recommendations were made to enhance the civic, 

linguistic, and economic integration of new Americans. Various campaigns, 

initiatives, pilots, partnerships, websites, and best practices were launched and 

shared by federal agencies, state and local governments, White House offices, 

businesses, educators, community and faith-based organizations, and 

philanthropists. 

Numerous foreign government and civic leaders approached the United 

States this year to learn about the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program and to seek

information about establishing or improving refugee resettlement programs in 

their countries. The Department of State has been deeply involved in helping to 

design programs for groups visiting the United States who are interested in 

refugee resettlement and integration, and in showcasing the best examples of 

successful local and national programs. These groups have met with federal 

officials, toured national resettlement agency headquarters, and visited dozens of 

local communities throughout the country to meet representatives from the public 
vii

and private agencies and organizations that welcome refugees and other 

immigrants every day.

Conclusion

America’s reputation as a nation of refuge provides a beacon of hope for 

persecuted people around the world and serves as a model for new resettlement 

nations. Through the USRAP, our government, cooperating private partners, and 

American citizens in communities throughout the country demonstrate day in and 

day out the generosity and core values of our nation. 
viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction i

Foreword ii

I. OVERVIEW OF U.S. REFUGEE POLICY 1

II. REFUGEE ADMISSIONS PROGRAM FOR FY 2017 5

Proposed Ceilings 5

Unallocated Reserve 6

Admissions Procedures 6

Eligibility Criteria 6

Priority 1: Individual Referrals 7

Priority 2: Group Referrals 8

FY 2017 Priority 2 Designations 9

Priority 3: Family Reunification Cases 12

FY 2017 Priority 3 Nationalities 14

Following to Join Reunification Cases 14

DHS/USCIS Refugee Adjudications 15

The Eligibility Determination 16

Background Security Checks 17

Processing Activities of the Department of State 17

Overseas Processing Services 17

Cultural Orientation 18

Transportation 19

Reception and Placement (R&P) 19

Office of Refugee Resettlement 20

III. REGIONAL PROGRAMS 24

Africa 25

Religious Freedom 26

Voluntary Repatriation 27

Local Integration 29

Third-Country Resettlement 30

FY 2016 U.S. Admissions 30

FY 2017 U.S. Resettlement Program 31
ix

East Asia 32

Religious Freedom 34

Voluntary Repatriation 36

Local Integration 37

Third-Country Resettlement 37

FY 2016 U.S. Admissions 37

FY 2017 U.S. Resettlement Program 37

Europe and Central Asia 38

Religious Freedom 41

Voluntary Repatriation 42

Local Integration 42

Third-Country Resettlement 43

FY 2016 U.S. Admissions 44

FY 2017 U.S. Resettlement Program 44

Latin America and the Caribbean 44

Religious Freedom 46

Voluntary Repatriation 46

Local Integration 46

Third and In-Country Resettlement 47

FY 2016 U.S. Admissions 49

FY 2017 U.S. Resettlement Program 49

Near East and South Asia 50

Religious Freedom 52

Voluntary Repatriation 54

Local Integration 55

Third-Country Resettlement 58

FY 2016 U.S. Admissions 60

FY 2017 U.S. Resettlement Program 60

IV. DOMESTIC IMPACT OF REFUGEE ADMISSIONS 61
x

LIST OF TABLES

Page

I. Refugee Admissions in FY 2015 and FY 2016, 

Proposed Refugee Admissions by Region for FY 2017 5

II. Proposed FY 2017 Regional Ceilings by Priority 24

III. Refugee Arrivals by Country of Origin, FY 2015 62

IV. Median Age and Gender of Refugee Arrivals, FY 2015 65

V. Select Age Categories of Refugee Arrivals, FY 2015 66

VI. Refugee Arrivals by State of Initial Resettlement, FY 2015 67

VII. Estimated Funding of Refugee Processing, Movement, and 

Resettlement FY 2016 and FY 2017 69

VIII. UNHCR Resettlement Statistics by Resettlement Country, 

CY 2015 70
1

I. OVERVIEW OF U.S. REFUGEE POLICY 

At the end of 2015, the estimated refugee population worldwide stood at 

21.3 million, with 16.1 million under the mandate of the United Nations High 

Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). This represents an increase of 1.7 million 

refugees under UNHCR mandate in one year. The United States actively supports

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

international and non-governmental organizations that provide protection and 

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

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

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

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

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

use of resources, maximizing humanitarian impact for the beneficiaries. 

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

voluntary return to their homeland. In 2015, some 201,400 refugees voluntarily 

repatriated to their country of origin – a nearly 60% increase over 2014, but 

unfortunately, still low. Refugee repatriation operations brought refugees home to 

Afghanistan, Sudan, Somalia, and Central African Republic, among others. These 

operations were carried out to protect returning refugees as well as to help them 

contribute to the stabilization, reconstruction, and development of their home 

countries.

Where opportunities for refugees’ safe and voluntary return remain elusive, 

the United States and its partners pursue self-sufficiency and temporary, indefinite, 

or permanent local integration in countries of asylum. The Department of State 

encourages host governments to protect refugees and to allow them to integrate 

into local communities. The State Department further promotes local integration 

by funding programs to enhance refugee self-reliance and support communitybased social services. Groups that have availed themselves of opportunities for 

local integration in recent years include Afghans in India, Angolans in Zambia, 

Burundians in Tanzania, Liberians and Sierra Leoneans in seven countries across 

West Africa, and Colombians in Ecuador, Costa Rica, Panama and Venezuela. 

Mali agreed to provide birth certificates to some 8,000 Mauritanian refugee 

children, paving the way for them to eventually apply for Malian citizenship.
2

UNHCR estimates that there are at least 10 million people worldwide who 

are not recognized as nationals of any state and are therefore stateless. Without 

citizenship in any country, many stateless persons are unable to move freely, to 

access basic services such as health care and schools, to work legally, to own 

property, or to access police protection and systems of justice. The United States 

supports UNHCR’s mandate to prevent and reduce statelessness, including its 

Global Campaign to End Statelessness by 2024. The United States is encouraging 

States to address gaps in citizenship laws that result in statelessness, to eliminate 

provisions that discriminate against women, to facilitate naturalization for stateless 

persons, and to ensure universal birth registration. U.S. contributions to UNHCR’s 

core budget support efforts to prevent and address statelessness in Burma, the 

Dominican Republic, Cote d’Ivoire, Nepal, Sudan, Syria, and elsewhere. In 

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

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

more to help stateless people and refugees in protracted situations. This approach 

is reflected in, for example, the current resettlement of protracted Rohingya 

refugees from Burma who were born outside Burma, mostly in Malaysia and 

Thailand.

The United States, like UNHCR, recognizes that resettlement in third 

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

solution. For some refugees, resettlement is the best, and perhaps the only, 

alternative. In particular, stateless refugees who arrive in the United States for 

resettlement not only find a durable solution to their displacement, but are also 

placed on a path that will afford the opportunity to naturalize and resolve their 

stateless status.

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

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

staff and construction of facilities. As a result, UNHCR has substantially increased 

referrals to the United States and other resettlement countries, submitting more 

than 134,000 individuals for resettlement in 2015 – an increase of nearly 30% over 

2014. We plan to continue to work with UNHCR and consult with host 

governments on group referrals. We will continue to assess resettlement needs and 

allow qualified NGOs to refer refugee applicants to the program.

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

number of countries active in resettlement. In 2015, UNHCR referred refugees to 

27 countries for resettlement consideration. Over 90 percent of refugees referred 

for resettlement were referred to the United States, Australia, and Canada. Smaller 

numbers of referrals were made to Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Czech Republic, 
3

Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, 

Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Spain, 

Sweden, Switzerland, Uruguay, and the United Kingdom.

While the overall number of refugees referred by UNHCR and the 

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

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

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

availability of funds. Some 64 percent of UNHCR-referred refugees who were 

resettled in 2015, were resettled in the United States (see Table VIII).

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

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

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

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

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

largest single donor to UNHCR, providing over $1.33 billion in FY 2015. During 

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

Asia have helped energize efforts by UNHCR and other countries to ensure that 

first asylum is maintained for larger refugee populations and that local integration 

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

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

regional tensions.

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

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

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

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

former Yugoslavia) and began to admit refugees representing over 50 nationalities 

per year. Today, officials from the Department of Homeland Security’s U.S. 

Citizenship and Immigration Services (DHS/USCIS) often conduct refugee 

applicant interviews in remote locations and focus on the individuals and 

populations who most need third country resettlement opportunities.

While maintaining the United States’ leadership role in humanitarian 

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

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

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

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

United States and continues to employ rigorous security measures to protect 

against threats to our national security.
4

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

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

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

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

refugees receive services in the first 30 to 90 days after arrival in accordance with 

established standards. During and after the initial resettlement period, the Office 

of Refugee Resettlement at the Department of Health and Human Services 

(HHS/ORR) provides technical assistance and funding to states, the District of 

Columbia, and nonprofit organizations to help refugees become self-sufficient and 

integrated into U.S. society. ORR programs use formula and discretionary grants 

to provide cash and medical assistance, employment and training programs, and 

other services to newly arriving and recently arrived refugees. Refugees arriving 

in the United States are expected to be future U.S. citizens. Refugees are 

immediately authorized to work upon resettlement in the United States, and after 

one year in this country are required to apply for lawful permanent resident status. 

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

resident status is eligible to apply for citizenship.
5

REFUGEE ADMISSIONS PROGRAM FOR FY 2017

PROPOSED CEILINGS

TABLE I

REFUGEE ADMISSIONS IN FY 2015 AND FY 2016

PROPOSED REFUGEE ADMISSIONS BY REGION FOR FY 20172

REGION

FY 2015

ACTUAL 

ARRIVALS

FY 2016

CEILING

FY 2016

PROJECTED 

ARRIVALS

PROPOSED 

FY2017

CEILING

Africa 22,472 25,000 27,500 35,000

East Asia 18,469 13,000 14,000 12,000

Europe and Central Asia 2,363 4,000 4,000 4,000

Latin 

America/Caribbean 2,050 3,000 1,500 5,000

Near East/South Asia 24,579 34,000 38,000 40,000

Regional Subtotal 69,933 79,000 85,000 96,000

Unallocated Reserve 6,000 14,000

Total 69,933 85,000 85,000 110,000

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

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

residence. Additionally, under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) § 

101(a)(42)(B), the President may specify circumstances under which individuals 

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

considered a refugee for purposes of admission to the United States. The FY 2017

refugee admissions proposal recommends continuing such in-country processing 

for specified persons in Iraq, Cuba, Eurasia and the Baltics, Honduras, El Salvador 

and Guatemala. Persons for whom resettlement is requested by a U.S. ambassador 

in any location in the world may also be considered, with the understanding that 

those within their countries of nationality or last habitual residence will only be 

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

the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Likewise, the U.S. will consider 

 

2

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

Admissions Program elements.
6

accepting a limited number of referrals from qualified NGOs of highly vulnerable 

individuals within their countries of nationality or last habitual residence following 

Department of State consultation with USCIS.

Unallocated Reserve

This proposal includes 14,000 unallocated admissions numbers to be used if 

needed for additional refugee admissions from any region. The unallocated 

numbers would only be used following notification to Congress.

ADMISSIONS PROCEDURES

Eligibility Criteria

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

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

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

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

PRM coordinates within the Department of State, as well as with DHS/USCIS and 

other agencies, in carrying out this responsibility.

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

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

accordance with a determination made by the President after appropriate 

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

United States for the purpose of refugee resettlement consideration is determined 

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

categories of cases:

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

circumstances and apparent need for resettlement;

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

by virtue of their circumstances and apparent need for resettlement; and

 Priority 3 – Individual cases from designated nationalities granted access 

for purposes of reunification with family members already in the United 

States.

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

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

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

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

Following to Join cases below.)
7

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

does not necessarily mean an applicant meets the statutory definition of a 

“refugee” or is admissible to the United States under the INA. Applicants who are 

eligible for access to the USRAP within the established priorities are presented to 

DHS/USCIS officers for interview. The ultimate determination as to whether an 

applicant can be admitted as a refugee is made by DHS/USCIS in accordance with 

criteria set forth in the INA and various security protocols.

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

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

does not establish precedence in the order in which cases will be processed. Once 

cases are established as eligible for access under one of the three processing 

priorities, they all undergo the same processing steps. 

PRIORITY 1 – INDIVIDUAL REFERRALS

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

nationality,

3

usually with compelling protection needs, for whom resettlement 

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

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

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

refugees worldwide, has historically referred the vast majority of cases to the 

United States under this priority. Some NGOs providing humanitarian assistance 

in locations where there are large concentrations of refugees have also undergone 

training by PRM and DHS/USCIS and have been designated as eligible to provide 

Priority 1 referrals.

Process for Priority 1 Individual Referral Applications

Priority 1 (P-1) referrals from UNHCR and NGOs are submitted to the 

appropriate Regional Refugee Coordinator, who forwards the referrals to the 

appropriate Resettlement Support Center (RSC) for case processing and scheduling 

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

referrals for completeness and may consult with DHS/USCIS in considering these 

referrals.

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

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

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

 

3

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

may be granted access to the USRAP. 
8

(DHS/USCIS) concur. When a Priority 1 referral cannot be made, in some limited 

cases, a Department of State request to DHS/USCIS for parole may be an 

appropriate option.

PRIORITY 2 – GROUP REFERRALS

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

USRAP.

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

access and predefined group access, often upon the recommendation of UNHCR. 

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

characteristics that define the group. In general, these characteristics are the reason 

members of the group have been persecuted in the past or face persecution in the 

future.

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

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

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

and (as appropriate) with UNHCR and others, defines the specific criteria for 

access. Once the designation is in place, applicants may approach the program at 

any of the processing locations specified as available for the group to begin the 

application process. Applicants must demonstrate that they meet the specified 

criteria to establish eligibility for access to the USRAP.

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

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

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

Bosnian refugees during the 1990s. It is now in use for Iranians belonging 

religious minorities, Iraqis with links to the United States, and individuals from El 

Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras with lawfully present parents in the United 

States.
9

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

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

whether individual applicants qualify for access and should be presented to 

DHS/USCIS for interview. Applicants who clearly do not meet the access 

requirements are “screened out” prior to the DHS/USCIS interview.

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

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

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

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

referring entity (usually UNHCR) provides the biographical data of eligible 

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

situations in which the intensive labor required to generate individual UNHCR 

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

counterproductive. Often, predefined groups are composed of persons with similar 

persecution claims. The predefined group referral process saves the labor intensive 

individual referral step and can conserve scarce UNHCR resources. In recent 

years, predefined groups have included certain Burmese in Thailand, certain 

Bhutanese in Nepal, and certain Congolese in Tanzania and Rwanda. Predefined 

group referrals with clear, well-defined eligibility criteria and several methods for 

cross-checking group membership can serve as a fraud deterrent as well, 

preventing non-group members from gaining access to the USRAP by falsely 

claiming group membership. Once an individual gains access to processing via a 

P-2 designation, all other processing steps are the same as for those referred by P1, including individual pre-screening and USCIS interviews, and all security and 

medical checks.

FY 2017 Priority 2 Designations

In-country processing programs

The following ongoing programs that process individuals still in their 

country of origin under Priority 2 group designations will continue in FY 2017, all 

of which are “open-access” type P-2s:

Eurasia and the Baltics

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

Catholic and Orthodox religious adherents identified in the Lautenberg 

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

8 U.S.C. § 1157) as amended (“Lautenberg Amendment”), with close family in the 
10

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

individuals are considered under a reduced evidentiary standard for establishing a 

well-founded fear of persecution.

Cuba

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

persecuted religious minorities, former political prisoners, forced-labor conscripts, 

and persons deprived of their professional credentials or subjected to other 

disproportionately harsh or discriminatory treatment resulting from their perceived 

or actual political or religious beliefs.

Iraqis Associated with the United States

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

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

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

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

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

Persons in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras

Under this Priority 2 program that was expanded in July 2016, certain lawfully 

present parents in the United States can request access to a refugee interview for 

sons and daughters still in the country of origin, as well as the biological parent of 

an unmarried child under 21, and caregivers.

Groups of Humanitarian Concern outside the Country of Origin 

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

undergoing processing with significant arrivals anticipated during FY 2016. 

(Additional Priority 2 groups may be designated over the course of FY 2017.)

Pre-defined Group Access P-2s:

Ethnic Minorities and others from Burma in camps in Thailand

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

registered in one of nine refugee camps along the Thai/Burma border, are 

identified by UNHCR as in need of resettlement, and expressed interest prior to 

January 2014 (depending on the location), are eligible for processing.
11

Ethnic Minorities from Burma in Malaysia

Under this Priority 2 designation, members of ethnic minorities from Burma who 

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

of resettlement are eligible for processing.

Bhutanese in Nepal

Under this existing Priority 2 designation, Bhutanese refugees registered by 

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

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

Congolese in Rwanda

Under this new Priority 2 designation, certain Congolese refugees in Rwanda who 

arrived between 1994 and 2005 were verifiably registered in 2011 or 2012 and 

identified as in need of resettlement are eligible for processing.

Congolese in Tanzania

Under this Priority 2 designation signed in May 2015, certain Congolese refugees 

registered by UNHCR in Tanzania whose residence in Nyaragusu camp was 

confirmed in a 2013-2014 UNHCR verification exercise are eligible for 

processing.

Open Access Model P-2s:

Iranian Religious Minorities

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

are eligible for processing and are considered under a reduced evidentiary standard 

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

the Lautenberg Amendment as amended in 2004 by Sec. 213 of Title II, Division 

E, of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2004, P.L. 108-199, 118 Stat. 3 (“the 

Specter Amendment”).

Iraqis Associated with the United States 

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

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

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

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

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

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

Syrian Beneficiaries of Approved I-130 petitions

Under this new Priority 2 designation, Syrian beneficiaries of approved I-130 

immigrant visa petitions, for whom immigrant visas have not yet been issued, are 
12

eligible for refugee processing. For U.S. citizens, eligible relationships to the U.S. 

based petitioner include spouse, children (regardless of age or marital status), 

siblings and parents. For lawful permanent residents, eligible relationships to the 

petitioner include spouse and unmarried children (regardless of age).

PRIORITY 3 – FAMILY REUNIFICATION 

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

designated nationalities who have immediate family members in the United States 

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

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

nationalities eligible for processing under this priority. The PRM Assistant 

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

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

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

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

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

of resettlement provides insight into ongoing refugee situations which could create 

the need for family-reunification processing. In addition, prospective or ongoing 

repatriation efforts and U.S. foreign policy interests must be weighed in 

determining which nationalities should be eligible.

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

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

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

have had an Affidavit of Relationship (AOR) filed on his or her behalf by an 

eligible family member in the United States during a period in which the 

nationality was included on the eligibility list, and have been cleared for onward 

processing by the DHS/USCIS Refugee Access Verification Unit (RAVU).

Family members who are eligible to file an AOR are persons who were 

admitted to the United States as refugees or were granted asylum, including 

persons who are lawful permanent residents of the United States or U.S. citizens 

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

asylum. The U.S.-based filer must be at least 18 years of age at the time the AOR 

is filed and must file the AOR within 5 years of the date he or she entered the 

United States as a refugee or was granted asylum. The USRAP may reject any 

AOR for a relationship that does not comport with public policy, such as under-age 

or plural marriages.
13

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

qualified for P-3 access: spouse, unmarried children under 21, and/or parents. A 

U.S.-based family member may apply for a same-sex spouse if a legal marriage 

was conducted and documented. Cognizant that same-sex marriage is not legal in 

the vast majority of refugee-producing and refugee-hosting countries, the United 

States will allow a qualifying individual to file for P-3 access for a same-sex 

partner if he or she can provide evidence that he/she had a relationship with the 

partner for at least one year overseas prior to the submission of the AOR and 

considered that person to be his/her spouse or life partner, and that the relationship 

is ongoing, together with evidence that legal marriage was not an obtainable option 

due to social and/or legal prohibitions.

Under certain circumstances, a U.S.-based individual may file for P-3 access 

for an opposite-sex partner if he or she can provide evidence that he/she had a 

relationship with the partner for at least one year overseas prior to the submission 

of the AOR and considered that person to be his/her spouse or life partner, and that 

the relationship is ongoing, together with evidence that legal marriage was not an 

obtainable option due to social and/or legal prohibitions.

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

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

under 21 may derive refugee status from the principal applicant for refugee status.

On a case-by-case basis, an individual may be added to a qualifying family 

member’s P-3 case if that individual:

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

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

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

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

3) demonstrates exceptional and compelling humanitarian circumstances 

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

These individuals are not “spouses” or “children”, under INA 207(c)(2)(A) 

and thus cannot derive their refugee status from the Principal Applicant. They 

must, therefore, independently establish that they qualify as a refugee.
14

FY 2017 Priority 3 Nationalities

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

Afghanistan 

Bhutan

Burundi

Central African Republic

Colombia

Cuba

Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK)

Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC)

El Salvador

Eritrea

Ethiopia

Guatemala

Haiti

Honduras

Iran

Iraq

Mali

Somalia

South Sudan

Sudan

Syria

Uzbekistan

FOLLOWING-TO-JOIN FAMILY REUNIFICATION PETITIONS

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

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

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

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

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

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

DHS/USCIS’ Service Center Operations Directorate, preliminarily or finally, 

(signifying adequate proof of eligibility based on a file review), the State 

 

4

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

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

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

counted in the number of refugees admitted annually.
15

Department’s National Visa Center then forwards the petition to the USCIS office,5 

embassy, or consulate nearest to the location of the beneficiary for travel eligibility

determination.

Individuals who gain access to the USRAP through an approved I-730 

petition are interviewed by DHS/USCIS or consular officers to verify the 

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

status and admissibility to the United States. Beneficiaries are not required to 

establish past persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution, as they derive 

their status from the refugee relative in the United States who filed the petition. 

Beneficiaries of I-730 petitions may be processed within their country of origin or 

in other locations

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

Relative Petition and seek Priority 3 access for their qualifying family members (if 

eligible) simultaneously. In some cases, the I-730 petition will be the only option 

as the family members are still in their country of origin. It is also important to 

note that unlike the P-3 process, the I-730 or “follow-to-join” process does not 

allow the relative in the United States to petition for parents.

DHS/USCIS REFUGEE ADJUDICATIONS

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

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

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

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

determine eligibility for refugee status has been delegated to USCIS. In 2005, 

DHS/USCIS restructured the Refugee Affairs Division and established the Refugee 

Corps, a specially trained cadre of officers dedicated to adjudicating applications 

for refugee status. The Refugee Corps provides DHS/USCIS with the necessary 

resources and flexibility to respond to an increasingly diversified refugee 

admissions program. In each quarter of FY 2016, on average, USCIS deployed 

approximately 100 Refugee Officers, Supervisory Refugee Officers, and 

fingerprinters, plus an additional 70 USCIS officers on temporary assignment, to 

20-25 locations around the world to interview refugee applicants. DHS/USCIS 

also devotes substantial resources to security vetting, anti-fraud, and training 

 

5

Beginning in 2016, the final adjudication of I-730 petitions transferred to most USCIS international field offices are 

made by USICS international staff. 
16

related to refugee processing, and it has strong partnerships with the law 

enforcement, national security, and intelligence communities to maintain and 

promote the integrity of the USRAP.

In order to support the increased refugee admissions ceilings in FY 2016 and 

FY 2017, the Refugee Affairs Division has been authorized to increase its staffing 

from 158 to 292 employees, which includes adjudicators, headquarters staff, and 

supervisors/managers.

The Eligibility Determination

In order to be approved for classification as a refugee, an applicant must 

meet the refugee definition contained in § 101(a)(42) of the INA. That section 

provides that a refugee is a person who is outside his or her country of nationality 

or last habitual residence and is unable or unwilling to return to that country 

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

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

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

a person can meet the refugee definition when he or she is still within his or her

country of origin. The refugee definition excludes a person who has ordered, 

incited, assisted, or otherwise participated in persecution on account of race, 

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

Further, an applicant who has been “firmly resettled” in a third country may not be 

admitted as a refugee under INA Section 207. Applicants are also subject to 

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

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

may be exempted.

The grounds of inadmissibility that apply to refugee applicants include the 

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

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

Justice began to exercise a discretionary Secretarial authority to exempt certain 

categories of refugee applicants from TRIG inadmissibility based on a 

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

merited an exemption for humanitarian purposes. In FY 2015, DHS/USCIS began 

implementing two new exemptions for individuals who provided insignificant or 

“certain limited” material support (including through routine commercial or social
17

transactions, in the course of providing humanitarian assistance, or under subduress pressure), to undesignated terrorist organizations. As of June 2016, more 

than 14,900 TRIG exemptions have been granted to refugee applicants.6

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

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

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

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

fears about returning (or remaining), as well as questions concerning the 

applicant’s activities, background, and criminal history. The officer also considers 

evidence about conditions in the country of origin and assesses the applicant’s 

credibility and claim.

Background Security Checks

Refugee applicants of all nationalities are required to undergo background 

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

applicants and biometric (fingerprint) checks for refugee applicants within certain 

age limits. PRM, through its overseas Resettlement Support Centers, initiates 

required biographic name checks, while USCIS is responsible for collecting 

biometric data for screening. Biographic and biometric information is vetted 

against a broad array of law enforcement, intelligence community, and other 

relevant databases to help confirm identity, to check for any criminal or other 

derogatory information (including watchlist information), and to identify 

information that could inform lines of questioning during the interview. Refugee 

applicants must clear all required security checks prior to final approval of their 

application.

PROCESSING ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE

Overseas Processing Services

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

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

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

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

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

 

6 Over 6,700 of these exemptions pertained to Burmese refugee applicants. Approximately 6,930 of the exemptions 

related to applicants who provided material support to a terrorist organization under duress – for example, Iraqi 

applicants who paid a ransom for a kidnapped family member. Please note that there was a typographical error for 

the number of total TRIG exemptions in the FY 2015 Report to Congress; as of June 2015, more than 13,560 TRIG 

exemptions had been granted to refugee applicants.
18

DHS/USCIS adjudication. The RSCs assist applicants in completing documentary 

requirements and schedule DHS/USCIS refugee eligibility interviews. If an 

applicant is conditionally approved for resettlement by DHS/USCIS, RSC staff 

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

screening exams and attending cultural orientation programs. The RSC obtains 

sponsorship assurances and, once all required steps are completed, including all 

necessary security clearances, refers the case to IOM for transportation to the 

United States.

In FY 2016, NGOs (Church World Service, HIAS, and International Rescue 

Committee) worked under cooperative agreements with PRM as RSCs at locations 

in Austria (covering Austria and as of June, Israel), Kenya (covering sub-Saharan 

Africa), and Thailand (covering East Asia). International organizations (IOM and 

the International Catholic Migration Commission) supported refugee processing 

activities based in Ecuador, Jordan, Russia, Nepal, and Turkey which covered

Latin America, the Middle East, South and Central Asia, and Europe. The 

Department of State supported refugee processing in Havana, Cuba.

Cultural Orientation

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

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

experience by providing cultural orientation programs prior to departure for the 

United States as well as upon arrival. It is critical that refugees have a realistic 

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

and what their responsibilities will be.

Every refugee family is offered a copy of Welcome to the United States, a 

resettlement guidebook developed with contributions from refugee resettlement 

workers, resettled refugees, and government officials. The current edition is 

available in twelve languages: Arabic, Burmese, Chin, Dari, English, Farsi, Karen, 

Kinyarwanda, Nepali, Somali, Spanish, and Swahili. The previous (2007) edition 

is still available in eight other languages: Albanian, Amharic, 

Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian, French, Kirundi, Russian, Tigrinya, and Vietnamese. 

Through this book, refugees have access to accurate information about the initial 

resettlement period before they arrive in the United States. The Welcome to the 

United States refugee orientation video is available in 12 languages: Arabic, 

Burmese, Chin, Dari, English, Farsi, Karen, Kinyarwanda, Nepali, Somali, 

Spanish, and Swahili. The 2004 version of the video is available in four other 

languages: Karenni, Kirundi, Russian, and Tigrinya. All of these materials are 

available to download free of charge at www.COResourceExchange.org.
19

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

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

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

presentations featuring the experience of recently resettled refugees of the same 

ethnic group are made available to refugee applicants overseas. Groups featured 

include refugees from Bhutan, Burma, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Cuba, 

Darfur, and Iraq. Faces of Resettlement shows five individuals who entered the 

United States as refugees, from Bhutan, Burma, Burundi, Iraq, and Sudan. Each of 

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

their new communities. Faces of Resettlement also includes interviews with 

receiving community members. This video is accompanied by discussion guides 

for community members, service providers, and refugees.

The Department of State also offers a curriculum for cultural orientation 

after refugees’ arrival in the United States. Based on Reception and Placement 

(R&P) Program objectives and indicators, the curriculum was developed to provide 

domestic cultural orientation providers with lesson plans, tools, and techniques to 

help refugees develop the knowledge, skills, and attitudes they will need to adjust 

to new life in the U.S. In addition to lesson plans, the publication contains a User's 

Guide; a section on staff preparation; and a section on tools for trainers and 

orientation development, with sub-sections on topics such as instructional 

approach, working with groups of different sizes, incorporating English into 

orientation, and conducting needs assessments. A companion toolkit includes a 

model assessment intended to provide domestic orientation providers with a 

sample tool for assessing refugee understanding of orientation topics during the 

R&P period.

Transportation

The Department of State funds the international transportation of refugees 

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

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

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

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

paying at that time.

Reception and Placement (R&P)

In FY 2016, PRM funded cooperative agreements with nine private 

resettlement agencies to provide initial resettlement services to refugees arriving in 

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

reception and core services (including housing, furnishings, clothing and food, as 
20

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

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

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

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

nine organizations maintain a nationwide network of 309 affiliated offices in 180 

locations to provide services. Two of the organizations also maintain a network of 

27 affiliated offices through which unaccompanied refugee minors are placed into 

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

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

contributions from private and other sources, the participating agencies provide the 

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

 Sponsorship;

 Pre-arrival resettlement planning, including placement;

 Reception on arrival;

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

for at least 30 days;

 Cultural orientation; 

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

services, as needed; and

 Development and implementation of an initial resettlement service plan 

for each refugee.

OFFICE OF REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT (ORR) 

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

with resettlement assistance that includes employment training, English language 

training, cash assistance (in a manner that promotes early independence), and job 

placement – including providing women with equal opportunities to employment 

as men. ORR’s mission is to help refugees transition into the United States by 

providing benefits and assistance to achieve self-sufficiency and become integrated 

members of society as soon as possible. To this end, ORR funds and administers 

various programs, some of which are highlighted below.

State-Administered and Wilson-Fish Programs 

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

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

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

Refugee Cash Assistance (RCA). Refugees not eligible for Medicaid are eligible to 
21

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

state-administered programs that operate a publicly administered RCA program 

(33 states) RCA benefits are based on cash benefit levels established by state 

TANF programs. In states that operate their RCA program through a PublicPrivate Program (PPP) model (5 States) and WF states (12 States plus one county), 

the RCA benefit is based on the higher of the RCA rates outlined in the ORR 

regulations or the state TANF rates.

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

program, and is usually administered by local resettlement agencies. The WF 

program emphasizes early employment and economic self-sufficiency by 

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

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

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

replacement for the State when the State government declines to participate in the 

ORR-funded refugee assistance program.

ORR also provides states/WF programs with Formula Refugee Social 

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

based on arrival numbers and refugee concentration levels in counties with a high 

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

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

include: employment services, on-the-job training, English language instruction, 

vocational training, case management, translation/interpreter services, social 

adjustment services, health-related services, home management, childcare and 

transportation.

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

specialized programs through states/WF programs, including Cuban-Haitian, Older 

Refugees, Refugee School Impact, and Targeted Assistance.

ORR Matching Grant Program

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

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

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

households toward economic self-sufficiency through employment within four to 

six months of program eligibility (which usually begins on the date of arrival in the 

United States). In MG, self-sufficiency is defined as total household income from 

employment that enables a family unit to support itself without receipt of public 
22

cash assistance. For each MG participant, ORR awards $2,200 to participating 

national resettlement agencies, which then allocate funds to their networks of local 

affiliates. Agencies provide a 50% match to every federal dollar.

Through the ORR MG Program, local service providers ensure core 

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

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

management and employment services throughout the 180 day service period. 

Refugees who are unable to attain self-sufficiency by day 120 or 180 may access 

RCA for the remainder of the eight month eligibility period. In FY 2015, nearly 

30,000 individuals were newly enrolled in the program, and of those enrolled in the 

program for 180 days, 82% achieved self-sufficiency. Approximately 30% of 

refugees who arrive in a fiscal year participate in the ORR MG Program.

ORR Refugee Health

ORR addresses the health and emotional well-being of refugees by 

providing technical assistance on Refugee Medical Assistance and domestic 

refugee medical screening, supporting mental health awareness, managing the 

Services for Survivors of Torture and Refugee Health Promotion grant programs, 

and other health initiatives.

ORR Unaccompanied Refugee Minor (URM) Program

ORR provides funds to 15 states which administer over 20 Unaccompanied 

Refugee Minor (URM) programs. States contract with local licensed foster care 

agencies that provide specialized placements and services to URMs. URMs live in 

various placements including: traditional and therapeutic foster homes, group 

homes, semi-independent and independent living and residential treatment centers, 

and homes of relatives. URMs receive various services including: English 

language training, educational and vocational training, cultural preservation, social 

integration, family tracing, permanency planning, independent living, medical care, 

and mental health care. ORR regulations require states to provide services to 

URM in parity with the state’s Title IV-B foster care plan. 

Other ORR Discretionary Refugee Service Programs

ORR also provides funding to non-profit agencies to carry out special 

initiatives or programs for refugees including: case management, ethnic 

community development, home-based child care business development, individual 

development accounts, microenterprise development, and agricultural projects.
23

The Preferred Communities Program is implemented through the nine 

resettlement agencies and focuses on building capacity to receive an increasingly 

vulnerable refugee population. The program supports long-term case management 

services to the more at risk populations including, but not limited to, women heads 

of household and refugees with significant medical and mental health needs. 

Additionally, the program has allowed resettlement agencies the flexibility to 

address unanticipated arrivals such as refugees arriving in underserved areas, 

increased Cuban/Haitian arrivals and secondary migrants.

ORR Technical Assistance

ORR provides technical assistance (TA) to resettlement stakeholders 

through various organizations that have relevant expertise. Currently ORR’s TA 

providers assist stakeholders in the areas of community engagement/integration, 

employment, mental health, youth initiatives, services to survivors of torture, and 

monitoring. 
24

REGIONAL PROGRAMS

TABLE II

PROPOSED FY 2017 REGIONAL CEILINGS BY PRIORITY

AFRICA

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 20,000

Priority 2 Groups 14,500

Priority 3 Family Reunification Refugees 500

Total Proposed: 35,000

EAST ASIA

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 1,800

Priority 2 Groups 10,000

Priority 3 Family Reunification Refugees 200

Total Proposed: 12,000

EUROPE / CENTRAL ASIA

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 990

Priority 2 Groups 3,000

Priority 3 Family Reunification Refugees 10

Total Proposed: 4,000

LATIN AMERICA / CARIBBEAN

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 950

Priority 2 Groups 4,000

Priority 3 Family Reunification Refugees 50

Total Proposed: 5,000

NEAR EAST / SOUTH ASIA

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 19,000

Priority 2 Groups 20,900

Priority 3 Family Reunification Refugees 

 100

Total Proposed: 40,000

UNALLOCATED RESERVE 14,000

TOTAL PROPOSED CEILING: 110,000
25

AFRICA

There are currently nearly 5 million refugees across the African continent, 

constituting roughly 25 percent of the global refugee population. Refugee numbers 

in Africa increased by nearly half a million in 2015 due to new or intensified 

conflicts across the continent. There has been some progress finding opportunities 

for local integration in host countries in Africa but limited refugee repatriation. 

Third country resettlement has increased from the continent but falls short of 

needs. 

New and ongoing conflicts in three countries – Burundi, Nigeria, and South 

Sudan – are responsible for the growth in refugee numbers in 2015 and 2016. In 

Burundi, early 2015 election-related violence and the aftermath forced over 

250,000 refugees to flee to neighboring Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), 

Rwanda, Tanzania, and Uganda; this outflow is expected to continue throughout 

2016. Instability and violence in Nigeria, Cameroon, Chad, and Niger have 

displaced more than 2.4 million people in the region, including 2.2 million 

Nigerian internally displaced persons (IDPs) and some 170,000 Nigerian refugees 

to neighboring countries. Cameroon, Niger and Chad continue to struggle with 

rising numbers of IDPs. In South Sudan, ethnic-fueled political conflict that 

erupted in December 2013 continues. Nearly 1.7 million South Sudanese are 

internally displaced and total refugee numbers have now reached nearly 840,000.

Ongoing conflict in the DRC and Sudan has also continued to generate new 

refugee outflows over the past few years. Conflict in eastern DRC since mid-2012 

has led steady flows of Congolese to seek asylum in Uganda, Rwanda, and 

Burundi, bringing the total number of Congolese refugees to nearly 534,000. 

Conflict in Sudan’s Darfur region continued to displace people internally. The 

ongoing conflict with rebel groups in Sudan’s Southern Kordofan and Blue Nile 

states has forced some 300,000 Sudanese refugees to flee to South Sudan, Ethiopia, 

and Kenya since June 2011. The steady outflow of Eritreans also continues, not 

only to refugee camps in Ethiopia and eastern Sudan, but also further north as 

Eritreans attempt to migrate to Europe and beyond. Some 450,000 Eritreans have 

fled political repression, forced conscription, and economic collapse over the past 

decade.

Africa’s refugee numbers have also been augmented by conflicts beyond the 

continent, primarily in the neighboring Near East region. North Africa has long 

hosted large numbers of Palestinian refugees. The ongoing crisis in Syria has 

added more than 140,000 new refugees to the region including 120,000 in Egypt 

and 18,000 in Libya. The crisis in Yemen has led some 15,000 Yemenis and 

Somalis living in Yemen to flee to Djibouti and Somalia in 2015 to date, with 
26

higher numbers expected. No progress was made over the past year in seeking a 

resolution to the Western Saharan conflict that would enable an estimated 90,000 

Sahrawi refugees in Algeria to return home.

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

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

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

countries, such as Cameroon, Egypt, and Sudan, have forcibly returned refugees 

over the past year. For countries growing weary of hosting large refugee 

caseloads, we continue to advocate for first asylum and inclusion for refugees. 

And, for those countries that lack formal mechanisms for asylum, we continue to 

advocate for the establishment of such systems in consultation with UNHCR.

Religious Freedom

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

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

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

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

The Government of the State of Eritrea is responsible for severe religious 

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

repression by harassing, arresting, and detaining members of independent 

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

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

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

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

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

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

government reportedly holds individuals who are jailed for their religious 

affiliation at various locations. Often detainees are not formally charged, accorded 

due process, or allowed access to their families. While many are ostensibly jailed 

for evasion of military conscription, significant numbers were being held solely for 

their religious beliefs; the U.S. Committee for International Religious Freedom 

(USCIRF) estimates that between 1,200 and 3,000 individuals are being detained 

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

September 24, 1994 (almost 22 years), reportedly for evading compulsory military 

service, a term far beyond the maximum legal penalty of two years for refusing to 

perform national service.
27

In Sudan, the government continues to deny permits for the construction of 

new churches, detain church members, close or demolish pre-existing churches, 

restrict non-Muslim religious groups and missionaries from operating in or 

entering the country, censor religious materials and leaders, and arrest or intimidate 

suspected proselytizers. The government places restrictions on non-Muslims in a 

manner that is inconsistent with domestic and international obligations to uphold 

freedom of religion. Although there is no penalty for converting from another 

religion to Islam, converting from Islam is punishable by death. Authorities 

express their strong prejudice against conversion by occasionally subjecting 

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

converts to leave the country.

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

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

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

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

and other refugees who are victims of religious intolerance. Refugees from Eritrea 

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

access to the USRAP through Priority 3.

In Somalia the provisional federal constitution provides for freedom of 

religion within limits, although it enshrines Islam as the state religion. The law 

prohibits proselytism for any religion other than Islam. Since its inception in July 

2012, the Federal Government of Somalia has made incremental progress to 

establish institutions and expanding its authority, but its capacity to enforce the 

provisional constitution remains extremely limited, particularly outside of 

Mogadishu. There have been reports that non-Muslim individuals experience 

discrimination, violence, and detention because of their religious beliefs. Refugees 

from Somalia with certain refugee or asylee family members in the United States 

also have access to the USRAP through Priority 3.

Voluntary Repatriation

Voluntary repatriation to improved conditions in the home country is the 

most common and desirable durable solution, however there have been few 

refugee returns on the continent in recent years. Recent outflows have far 

surpassed repatriation reversing a trend of falling refugee numbers since the mid1990s. Large-scale organized repatriations to Angola, Liberia, Rwanda, and 

Burundi are largely complete, but residual populations remain. In the case of 

Burundi, many who returned in the early 2000s have fled again. UNHCR 

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

Liberia effective June 30, 2012, and for pre-1999 caseload Rwandan refugees 
28

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

return and to locally integrate residual populations where asylum countries agree to 

provide permanent residence or citizenship. The local integration of former 

Angolan refugees in Zambia progressed though resources are a constraint.

Smaller-scale repatriation efforts continue throughout the continent. In West 

Africa, out of an estimated 300,000 individuals who fled the 2010-2011 electionrelated violence in Côte d’Ivoire, over 240,000 have now returned home. 

Repatriation was delayed in 2014 and 2015 due to the Ebola crisis and related 

border closures but started up again in December 2015. UNHCR anticipates 

assisting with the return of 25,000 Ivoirian refugees from Liberia in 2016. In Mali, 

while UNHCR is not yet promoting refugee return to northern Mali, more than 

40,000 refugees have returned spontaneously in to safe regions under government 

control but periodic outbreaks of violence in 2015 in northern Mali have deterred 

would-be returnees and caused new refugee outflows to Niger during the year.

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

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

However, due to widespread conflict since 2013, all repatriation has stopped and 

the focus has instead shifted to emergency response to the new refugees. UNHCR, 

the Government of Kenya, and the Government of Somalia signed a tripartite 

agreement in 2013 that established a legal framework for the voluntary repatriation 

of Somali refugees from Kenya, and UNHCR has supported the voluntary return of 

approximately 13,300 Somalis to date to nine identified “safe” areas within 

Somalia. Most parts of Somalia, however, are not conducive to safe and 

sustainable refugee return. Despite the efforts of some asylum countries, including 

Israel, to repatriate Eritrean refugees, UNHCR has strongly discouraged returns to 

Eritrea given ongoing political repression and harsh treatment of returnees.

In Central Africa, while there were over 500,000 refugee returns to Burundi 

from 2002 to 2014, election-related violence that erupted in Burundi in April 2015, 

has generated over 250,000 refugees to date, many of them former refugees. 

Although the majority of Rwandan refugees returned home in the late 1990’s, 

some 100,000 are thought to remain in exile. With the cessation of prima facie 

refugee status for pre-1999 Rwandan refugees on June 30, 2013, most remaining 

Rwandans will be required either to repatriate or to seek non-refugee means of 

remaining in asylum countries. UNHCR had made significant progress in 

repatriating Congolese to eastern DRC earlier in the past decade. However, 

renewed hostilities between the Congolese government and other armed groups 

across eastern DRC erased most of these gains. Eastern DRC is too insecure for 

large-scale refugee return at this point. UNHCR did conclude its repatriation 

program for some 130,000 Congolese refugees to western DRC’s Equateur 
29

Province from 2012 through 2014. The relatively peaceful elections in the Central 

African Republic have raised hopes of refugee repatriation but while we anticipate 

some spontaneous returns to assess the situation, most refugees are still wary.

Local Integration

While most African countries adhere to encampment policies for refugees, 

many have allowed, or even encouraged, refugees to pursue economic activities, a 

sort of de facto integration, by providing land for refugee farmers or permitting 

refugees to open small businesses. Despite such de facto integration, refugees 

residing among the local population do not necessarily enjoy the same rights, 

entitlements to social services, or economic opportunities available to citizens or 

permanent residents. As a result, this piecemeal integration is often an interim, 

rather than a durable, solution for many African refugees. However, strengthened 

partnerships with development actors, including the World Bank, shows promise in 

facilitating more sustainable socio-economic integration of refugees.

In recent years, a number of African countries have offered more formal 

integration as a durable solution for residual refugee populations who will not or 

cannot repatriate. Among member countries of the Economic Community of West 

African States (ECOWAS), the issuance of identity documents by home 

governments and subsequent regularization of immigration status allows refugees 

to access legal residency and the right to work in host countries; Ivoirians will be 

the latest refugee population to benefit under these ECOWAS protocols as 

UNHCR pursues local integration for those who wish to remain in their countries 

of asylum in the coming years. Senegal offered Mauritanian refugees who wished 

to remain in Senegal the option of becoming Senegalese citizens in 2007, and 

UNHCR, in partnership with the Senegalese government, launched a campaign in 

2012 to provide digitized and biometric identity cards to some 19,000 refugees (of 

whom 14,000 were Mauritanians). The card guarantees holders the same rights as 

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

ECOWAS member states. In 2015, Mali provided birth certificates to some 8,000 

Mauritanian refugee children, facilitating access to state services such as education 

and paving the way for them to eventually apply for Malian citizenship.

In Southern Africa, the Government of Zambia has offered local integration 

to some 15,000 former Angolan refugees and up to 4,000 Rwandans. The 2012 

initiative offers permanent residence status to the former Angolan refugees --

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

Zambians. The Government of Zambia has approved 6,000 applicants who meet 

eligibility criteria.
30

In East Africa, the Government of Tanzania has finalized citizenship for 

nearly 200,000 1972-era Burundi former refugees. While not offering a formal 

integration program, Uganda has permitted refugees to live and work outside of 

camps – most are in rural settlements where they have access to land or in urban 

areas. Ethiopia formally introduced an out-of-camp policy for Eritrean refugees in 

August 2010, allowing Eritreans to live outside camps if they are able to support 

themselves or if they have someone to sponsor them financially. Approximately 

3,500 Eritreans are part of this program now. While it does not give Eritrean 

refugees the right to work, it does offer the ability to pursue additional educational 

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

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

camps in eastern Sudan, although only a handful have been issued permits to date.

Third-Country Resettlement

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

increased resettlement referrals this past year.

FY 2016 U.S. Admissions

We project 27,500 African refugee arrivals in FY 2016. Two countries of 

origin – Somalia and DRC – still account for the vast majority of U.S. refugee 

admissions from Africa, followed by Eritrea, Sudan and Ethiopia. UNHCR’s 

enhanced Congolese Resettlement Strategy effort has reached its stated goal to 

refer 50,000 DRC refugees for resettlement from Rwanda, Uganda, Tanzania and 

Burundi to resettlement countries over five years. In FY 2016, the number of 

Congolese resettled to the United States (more than 14,000) will for the first time 

surpass the number of Somalis. UNHCR will continue to refer Congolese refugees 

from the four countries, as the resettlement need for Congolese from the eastern 

Congo still exists.

We expect to admit nearly 7,000 refugees from our two largest processing 

locations in Africa: Kenya and Ethiopia, plus another 600 from other locations in 

East Africa. Close to 5,500 refugees will depart for the United States from Kenya 

this year, mostly Somalis in the Kakuma and Dadaab camps. PRM continues to 

fund movements of refugee applicants from Dadaab to Kakuma for the purposes of 
31

DHS/USCIS interview and adjudication, since DHS/USCIS staff cannot work at 

Dadaab due to the security conditions. Applicants return to Dadaab for medical 

exams and other post-DHS/USCIS steps until their departure for the United States. 

Admissions from Ethiopia also continue to be strong, with approximately 3,500 

U.S. arrivals projected this year. Populations include primarily Somalis from 

camps in the east and Eritreans from the northern camps, including approximately 

60 Eritrean unaccompanied refugee minors. We also will resettle smaller numbers 

of Sudanese from camps in the west.

The United States continues to interview refugees from the Central African 

Republic in southern Chad and Sudanese Darfuri refugees in eastern Chad. We 

expect to admit nearly 600 refugees from Chad in FY 2016, part of an effort to 

build a large resettlement operation for Darfuri refugees in eastern Chad. An 

additional 450 refugees from various locations in West Africa are also expected to 

be admitted in FY 2016.

From Southern Africa, we expect to admit 2,500 refugees – primarily 

Somalis from South Africa and Congolese from Malawi, Namibia, Zambia, and 

Zimbabwe.

Outside of sub-Saharan Africa, we anticipate approximately 3,000 Sudanese, 

Somali, Ethiopian, Eritrean, and other sub-Saharan African refugees who will be 

arriving primarily from Egypt, Malta, or via one of the UNHCR Emergency 

Transit Centers in Romania and Slovakia. In all, we expect to admit refugees of 

nearly 30 African nationalities, processed in dozens of countries, during FY 2016.

FY 2017 U.S. Resettlement Program

We propose 35,000 resettlement numbers for African refugees in FY 2017 

that will largely parallel the populations admitted in FY 2016. As a result of 

discussions within the Department of State, UNHCR, the NGO community, and 

DHS/USCIS to identify caseloads, PRM has identified a number of nationalities 

and groups for processing during FY 2017.

In the Great Lakes region, processing of Congolese in Rwanda, Uganda, and 

Tanzania (and Burundi if the situation allows) is expected to result in a total of 

15,000 departures. Approximately 10,000 of these admissions will be the result of 

a P-2 group designation for Congolese refugees in Tanzania and from the camps in 

Rwanda. Departures from Uganda will result in 5,000 arrivals. It is yet to be 

determined whether the violence in Burundi that has prevented processing of 

Congolese there will result in lower arrival numbers from Burundi in FY 2016.
32

From East Africa, we expect to resettle just over 9,000 refugees each from 

Kenya and Ethiopia, primarily Somalis and Eritreans. We also expect UNHCR to 

continue referring Eritrean unaccompanied refugee minors at a rate of about 100 

per year from refugee camps in northern Ethiopia.

From southern Africa, we expect to admit 3,000 refugees consisting 

primarily of Somalis from South Africa and Congolese from Mozambique, 

Malawi, Namibia, Zambia, and Zimbabwe. 

In eastern Chad, UNHCR is establishing infrastructure for a robust 

resettlement program for Sudanese Darfuris with funding from PRM. This will be 

in addition to the continued processing of Central African Republic refugees from 

southern Chad. Total admission numbers from West Africa and Chad are expected 

to be approximately 1,000.

Outside of sub-Saharan Africa, we anticipate 2,000 Sudanese, Somali, 

Ethiopian, Eritrean and other sub-Saharan African refugees will be admitted from 

Egypt and Malta, and through the Emergency Transit Centers in Slovakia and 

Romania.

Proposed FY 2017 Africa program to include arrivals from the following 

categories: 

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 20,000

Priority 2 Groups 14,500

Priority 3 Family Reunification 500

Total Proposed Ceiling 35,000

EAST ASIA 

Several countries in East Asia host large and diverse refugee and asylum 

seeker populations. Recent years have seen important developments for these 

groups. Thailand, Bangladesh, and Malaysia continue to host large numbers of 

Burmese refugees and asylum-seekers, and thousands more are in the capital cities 

of Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur, and New Delhi, including Burmese, Pakistanis, Sri 

Lankans, West Africans, Syrians, Palestinians, and others. The number of persons 

of concern to UNHCR across the archipelago of Indonesia has also increased to 

nearly 13,800, including some 6,400 refugees, in recent years.
33

The U.S. government continues to press for meaningful political and 

democratic reforms in Burma, as well as a national ceasefire agreement with ethnic 

minority groups. The international community is engaged in discussions regarding 

the voluntary return of Burmese refugees, but acknowledges that ongoing conflict 

with armed ethnic groups, particularly in Kachin and Shan States, peace and 

national reconciliation efforts, and limited access to humanitarian and development 

assistance make large-scale return of refugees in safety and with dignity a slow, 

gradual process.

The resettlement of more than 100,000 Burmese refugees from Thailand 

since 2006 – including more than 85,000 to the United States – has significantly 

reduced the number of Burmese refugees in the camps who are eligible for the U.S. 

P-2 resettlement program. After more than seven years of large-scale resettlement, 

we have arrived at the natural conclusion of the group resettlement program with 

specific eligibility criteria for Burmese refugees who were re-registered by 

UNHCR in 2005 and formally registered by the Royal Thai Government (RTG). 

P-2 processing should conclude within one year. Those who do not exercise this 

option will be able to remain in the camps until safe and voluntary returns are 

possible. The United States will continue to accept individual referrals from 

UNHCR for all nationalities, including registered Burmese.

Since 2006, UNHCR Malaysia has operated the second largest refugee status 

determination program in the world and Malaysia is currently one of the largest 

resettlement countries in the U.S. program with some 8,200 projected refugee 

departures in FY16 and more than 69,500 since 2006. As of the end of March 

2016, there were 158,794 persons of concern registered with UNHCR in Malaysia 

of which 144,197, or 90.8 percent, are from Burma. In addition, some 14,600 

asylum-seekers and refugees from various countries – primarily Pakistan, Iraq, 

Somalia, Syria, Yemen, and Sri Lanka – are registered with UNHCR. Malaysia is 

not a party to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees or its 1967 

Protocol, but generally tolerates the presence of refugees.

The systematic persecution and discrimination of members of the Rohingya 

minority from Rakhine State, Burma have resulted in large numbers fleeing 

Rakhine State to seek safety in Bangladesh, Thailand, Malaysia, and other 

countries in the region for over five decades. The mid-2015 migrant crisis in the 

Indian Ocean began to unfold on May 1 when Thai authorities discovered mass 

graves of migrants in the south and began cracking down on migrant smuggling 

operations. The Administration continues to actively support the ongoing regional 

response that stresses the need to address the root causes of the crisis in source 

countries, including by promoting and protecting the human rights of members of 

vulnerable populations in source countries.
34

The last large influx of approximately 250,000 Rohingya from Rakhine State 

to the Cox’s Bazar district in southeastern Bangladesh began in July 1991. 

Between 1992 and 2005, over 236,000 UNHCR-registered Rohingya refugees 

were voluntarily repatriated from Cox’s Bazar to Rakhine State, most of them

immediately after their arrival to Bangladesh. No repatriation operation has taken 

place since. UNHCR supports over 32,600 refugees in two official refugee camps 

(Kutupalong and Nayapara) in Cox’s Bazar. In addition, the Government of 

Bangladesh (GOB) estimates that 300,000 – 500,000 undocumented Rohingya 

currently reside in various villages and towns outside the refugee camps and in 

makeshift settlement sites.

In February 2014, the Government of Bangladesh (GOB) announced its 

national strategy on “Myanmar Refugees and Undocumented Myanmar Nationals 

in Bangladesh”. The GOB completed the main census of the undocumented 

Rohingya during the first half of June and plans to publish the census results in 

December. The issuance of information cards will follow which we understand 

will ensure protection and access to basic services, including freedom of 

movement, access to livelihood, and education opportunities to the Rohingya who 

took part in the census. The U.S. government is encouraged by GOB commitments 

made in the national strategy, including the resumption of third country 

resettlement. We are prepared to resume resettlement activity immediately upon 

notification by the GOB that we may proceed. In addition, we expect ongoing 

UNHCR referrals of urban Burmese in India.

As reflected in the North Korean Human Rights Act, the United States 

remains deeply concerned about the human rights situation of North Koreans both 

inside the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) and in various 

countries in the region. The United States began resettling interested, eligible 

North Korean refugees and their family members in 2006 and remains committed 

to continuing this program.

Religious Freedom 

Although many governments in East Asia do not restrict religious freedom, 

religious believers face serious persecution in several countries. The DPRK, 

China, and Burma are designated by the Department of State as Countries of 

Particular Concern (CPCs) under the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 

for systematic, ongoing, and egregious violations of religious freedom.

The DPRK severely restricts religious freedom, including organized 

religious activity, except for that which is supervised tightly by officially 

recognized groups linked to the government. Although the DPRK constitution 
35

provides for “freedom of religious belief,” genuine religious freedom does not 

exist. Information about the day-to-day life of religious persons in the country is 

limited. Religious and human rights groups outside of the country have provided 

numerous reports that members of underground churches have been beaten, 

arrested, tortured, or killed because of their religious beliefs.

While the constitutions of China, Burma, and Vietnam provide for freedom 

of religion, in practice, these governments restrict or repress religious activities of 

some members of religious communities in a manner that is inconsistent with their 

commitments to uphold freedom of religion.

The Chinese government continues to harass and interfere with unregistered 

religious groups, most notably the unofficial Catholic churches loyal to the Holy 

See, Protestant “house churches,” some Muslim groups (especially ethnic Uighur 

Muslims in the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region), members of the Falun 

Gong, and Tibetan Buddhists reverent to the Dalai Lama. China additionally 

reprimanded members of government-sanctioned churches for advocacy on behalf 

of their church communities. Certain religious or spiritual groups are banned by 

law. The criminal law defines some banned groups as “evil cults” and those 

belonging to them can be sentenced to prison or administrative detention. This 

includes Falun Gong and some other qigong-based groups, in addition to some 

Christian groups. Although legislation officially abolished the Reeducation 

through Labor (RTL) system in December 2013, religious believers have been 

harassed, arrested, detained in “black jails” without due process and sentenced to 

long jail terms. There have been credible allegations of torture.

In Burma, the government implemented considerable political and economic 

reforms, resulting in improved respect for many human rights. However, the 

government continues to discriminate against members of religious minority 

groups. Members of some ethnic groups, including those not formally recognized 

as citizens – such as the Muslim Rohingya in northern Rakhine State – are not 

protected under anti-discrimination laws. In 2012, intercommunal conflict led to 

the death of nearly 200 Rohingya and the displacement of 140,000 people. 

Throughout 2013-2015 isolated incidents of violence against Rohingya individuals 

continued to take place.

Government authorities, through various policies and practices, subjected 

Rohingya Muslims to physical abuse, arbitrary arrest and detention, restrictions on 

religious practice and travel, and discrimination in employment, social services, 

and access to citizenship. Religious minority populations, including Muslims, 

Christians, and other religious minorities, experienced arrest and detention, 

restrictions on religious practice, and various forms of discrimination. At the same 
36

time, the government continued to support interfaith dialogue and provided some 

members of the international community and international organizations greater 

access to ethnic minority areas.

Vietnam and the United States signed an agreement on religious freedom in 

May 2005, under which Vietnam committed to improving the protection of 

religious freedom in Vietnam. As a result of the progress Vietnam made after 

signing the agreement, the U.S. Government removed Vietnam from the CPC list 

in November 2006. While there have been some improvements, Vietnam’s 

religious freedom record has been mixed. Progress has been made with regard to 

the registration/recognition of religious groups and congregations and many 

religious groups have experienced expanded freedom of assembly. However, 

religious organizations must undergo an onerous registration process for almost all 

normal religious activities. There are also reports of harassment at the local level, 

including through the use of land laws. Several Protestant congregations in rural 

areas continue to report harassment, including beatings and forced renunciations.

Nationals of the DPRK, Vietnam, China, Laos, and Burma have access to 

the USRAP. North Korean refugees also have access to family reunification 

processing through Priority 3.

Voluntary Repatriation

Although the Burmese government has taken steps to implement democratic 

and political reforms, ongoing fighting continues in Kachin and northern Shan 

States, and tensions remain in Rakhine State since the June and October 2012 

violence. The new government continues to work towards a national reconciliation 

and peace process but it is too early to tell. We are hopeful that substantial 

progress towards this goal will be made in the near future. UNHCR continues with 

its planning for facilitated returns and continues its discussions with the RTG, 

Burmese government, NGOs working on the Thailand-Burma border, and the 

Karen and Karenni refugee communities; however, conditions are not yet 

conducive for large-scale returns and refugees often cite the lack of infrastructure, 

land and security issues in southeast Burma. The United States and other donor 

governments continue to engage regularly with the Thai government concerning 

the future of the nine refugee camps on the Thai-Burma border.

Local Integration 

Due to fears of a “pull factor,” countries in the region have traditionally been 

reluctant to integrate refugees or to grant asylum. Local integration remains a 

difficult option, due to opposition from host countries, such as Thailand, 

Bangladesh, Malaysia, and India. UNHCR and the international community 
37

continue to advocate for these governments to make policy changes relating to 

refugees, and to expand humanitarian protection and assistance space for refugees, 

asylum seekers, and other persons of concern.

Third-Country Resettlement 

The United States continues to lead third country resettlement efforts in the 

region. Other countries, including Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the 

Nordic countries, resettle refugees referred by UNHCR. In FY 2016, the United 

States processed UNHCR-referred refugee cases in China, the Hong Kong Special 

Administrative Region, Indonesia, Malaysia, Mongolia and Thailand.

FY 2016 U.S. Admissions 

We expect to admit close to 14,000 refugees from East Asia in FY 2016.

This will include nearly 4,600 members of Burmese ethnic minorities (mostly 

Karen, Karenni, and Kachin) living in camps along the Thai-Burma border, over 

7,900 Burmese (of various ethnic minorities) in Malaysia, and a smaller number of 

urban refugees of various nationalities in the region. 

FY 2017 U.S. Resettlement Program 

We expect to admit up to 12,000 refugees from East Asia in FY 2017. This 

will include up to 3,500 members of Burmese ethnic minorities (mostly Karen and 

Karenni) living in camps along the Thai-Burma border, some 5,500 Burmese (of 

various ethnic minorities) in Malaysia, and a number of urban refugees of various 

nationalities in the region.

Proposed FY 2017 East Asia program to include arrivals from the following 

categories: 

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 1,800

Priority 2 Groups 10,000 

Priority 3 Family Reunification 200

Total Proposed Ceiling 12,000
38

EUROPE AND CENTRAL ASIA

In 2015, Europe experienced a dramatic increase in asylum seekers. Europe 

continued to host large refugee populations and other persons affected by conflict, 

including those who, over the last two decades, have been left in situations of 

protracted displacement – some in dire conditions. In its 2016-2017 Global 

Appeal, UNHCR reported that its priorities are to provide emergency assistance to 

refugee arrivals and mixed movements, safeguard asylum space and provide 

acceptable reception conditions, build and maintain fair asylum systems 

throughout Europe, and provide durable solutions to displaced populations in the 

Balkans, the Caucasus, and in Ukraine.

The large increase in the number of people risking their lives at sea in search 

of safety in Europe made it the largest mass migration since the Second World 

War. By the end of 2015, there were over a million arrivals in Italy and Greece. 

Over 850,000 arrived in Greece alone. The European Union after initially 

struggling to arrive at a coordinated policy to address the situation has agreed upon 

a Joint Action Plan with Turkey to reduce these flows. Under the plan, the EU has 

promised to provide over 6 billion euros to Turkey in humanitarian assistance and 

development aid to help support programs for refugees in Turkey. The plan also 

allows for Greece to return to Turkey those ineligible for international protection in 

Greece. The EU requires that the agreement be implemented in full compliance

with international and EU law.

In light of this crisis, the challenge for Europe remains two-fold. Providing 

humanitarian assistance to migrants and refugees arriving on their shores after 

undertaking dangerous maritime journeys and integrating the more than one 

million who arrived last year. UNHCR and IOM published a Regional Refugee 

and Migrant Response Plan for Europe to provide humanitarian assistance in 

affected countries including Turkey and Greece. The United States has contributed 

almost $44 million to international organizations in humanitarian assistance to 

provide life sustaining assistance, protection to vulnerable populations and 

registration assistance to affected countries. The long-term integration challenges 

are most acute in Germany, Sweden, Austria and Finland, which received the bulk 

of the asylum seekers last year. We anticipate that many other countries will face 

challenges (albeit at a smaller scale) as they work to follow through with 

commitments to relocate individuals from Greece and Italy and/or participate in 

voluntary resettlement programs.

Despite the fact that a majority of countries in the region are party to the 

1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol, 

countries’ compliance with these instruments remains problematic. UNHCR and 
39

other stakeholders continue to build host country protection capacity and are 

helping to strengthen asylum systems and protection laws in the region; however, 

many of these countries have been slow or reluctant to recognize and integrate 

refugees and other at-risk individuals. The protection provided by some 

governments in the region to refugees, asylum seekers, and other migrants is 

limited and public intolerance, including attacks against members of minority 

populations, is common. There are documented cases of refoulement. UNHCR 

has been working with many of these governments to establish and/or reform 

asylum procedures and refugee protection laws. 

The 1990’s break-up of the Soviet Union created newly independent states 

with sizeable populations of stateless individuals due to gaps in nationality laws 

and inconsistent implementation of those laws. Difficulty in establishing 

citizenship at the time of succession has created subsequent problems for children 

born to an undocumented parent(s). The problem of statelessness remains in the 

region, although some states, such as Turkmenistan, have taken steps to register 

stateless individuals and facilitate their acquisition of nationality.

According to UNHCR, as of April 2016, there were over 360,000 refugees 

and IDPs in the Balkans, almost all of whom have been displaced for a decade or 

longer. Over 200,000 persons of this population are displaced from Kosovo, most 

of whom currently live in Serbia. UNHCR estimates that more than 90,000 

individuals in this group are in need of assistance. Since 2000, the overall level of 

return to Kosovo from Serbia has been low. While there have been over 26,000 

voluntary returns of minorities to Kosovo since the conflict ended, housing, 

documentation issues, a lack of employment opportunity, and occasional violence 

directed against ethnic Serbs in Kosovo has limited continuing return prospects.

Despite the situation in Kosovo, since 2010, the countries of the region –

with the assistance of the international community – made significant progress 

toward resolving a large part of the refugee situation in the Balkans. A November 

2011 ministerial meeting in Belgrade brought together Ministers of Foreign Affairs 

from Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Montenegro to sign a Joint 

Declaration expressing their collective will to resolve the protracted refugee and 

displacement situation. They committed their countries to a Regional Housing 

Program (RHP) for refugees and IDPs supported by international donors.

The RHP was designed to create durable solutions for up to 74,000 of the 

most vulnerable refugees and IDPs in those countries. While principally affecting 

housing, the RHP has established the Regional Coordination Forum to discuss 

other pertinent issues such as unpaid pensions, civil documentation, exchange of 

data and other public information. An international donors’ conference in April 

2012 succeeded in raising over $340 million (€260 million) in pledges to support 
40

the RHP over five years. The United States has provided $20 million between 

FY12 and FY14, and U.S. involvement is seen as a critical ingredient to the RHP’s 

success. With over a dozen projects approved and several well-underway, we 

expect FY16 and FY17 to be the years where we see housing solutions to be 

completed and delivered to a large number of beneficiaries eligible for the RHP.

Although governments have taken important steps to assist individuals 

displaced by the collapse of the Soviet Union and related conflicts, IDPs and 

returnees still await housing compensation, restitution, or alternative 

accommodation provision in the North and South Caucasus. The Caucasus region, 

comprised of parts of Russia, Georgia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan, still hosts over 

1.3 million persons of concern for PRM. The Nagorno-Karabakh War displaced 

over 800,000 Azerbaijanis in several waves between 1988 and 1994. Today 

600,000 IDPs remain, almost 7 percent of Azerbaijan’s population. The vast 

majority live in temporary shelters, administrative buildings, dormitories, and 

hostels. The government is increasingly providing housing and livelihood support 

to vulnerable IDPs, but more needs to be done to support integration to aid its 

displaced population.

Armenia received 350,000 refugees from Azerbaijan, of whom almost 3,000 

remain as refugees. A large number emigrated to other countries, and nearly 

90,000 were ultimately naturalized in Armenia. Many refugees and former 

refugees continue to live in unsuitable collective housing or remote villages with 

insufficient access to government services. A struggling economy and the recent 

influx of an estimated 17,000 Syrian-Armenians has left the Armenian government 

few resources to address refugee concerns, and the country remains dependent on 

international humanitarian and development assistance. Georgia also has been 

affected by large population movements since the 1990s as consequences of the 

breakup of the Soviet Union and the occupation of two regions, Abkhazia and 

South Ossetia. Although an estimated 147,000 people have returned to their 

homes in the Gali district (in the Abkhazia region), secured a durable housing 

solution elsewhere in Georgia, or remained in their original places of residence 

near the South Ossetia region, approximately 265,000 remain displaced from the 

1993 and 2008 wars.

Finally, in Ukraine, fighting between government troops and combined 

Russian-Separatist forces continues despite the signing of ceasefire agreements in 

September 2014, February 2015, and September 2015. Russia’s attempted 

occupation of Crimea, and the fighting in parts of eastern Ukraine have resulted in 

over two million people displaced from their homes, including over 1.3 million to 

neighboring countries. Although most IDPs have settled in regions bordering the 

conflict zone, they are increasingly settling in more remote areas of the country as 
41

host communities reach absorption capacity. Integration opportunities are limited 

for displaced individuals as displacement increases, and needs outstrip the response 

capacity of local governments and community groups. 

Religious Freedom

The status of religious freedom varies widely across Europe and Central 

Asia. Some countries place legal restrictions or prohibitions on the wearing of 

religious attire in schools, in government employment, or in public, particularly 

impacting Muslims, Jews, Christians, and Sikhs.

Several countries in the region mandate the registration of religious groups. 

Registration typically is required to rent or own property, hold religious services, 

appoint military and prison chaplains, and receive state subsidies. Restitution of 

religious properties is an issue yet to be fully resolved. Nontraditional religious 

groups are sometimes labeled as “sects” or “cults” by their home governments and 

may be subject to harassment and discrimination.

Uzbekistan’s policy is to ban Islamic groups it broadly determines as 

extremist and to criminalize membership in such groups. In Turkmenistan, there 

were reports in 2014 of beatings, imprisonment, arbitrary detention, threats of 

sexual assault, searches, confiscation of religious materials, and verbal abuse 

against religious minorities, particularly Jehovah’s Witnesses. Under Tajikistan’s 

law, persons under the age of 18 cannot participate in public religious activities 

and a ruling by Tajikistan’s highest Islamic religious body ban women from the 

majority Hanafi Sunni Muslim community from attending public religious 

services. Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan are designated by the Department of State 

as CPCs under the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 for systematic, 

ongoing, and egregious violations of religious freedom.

There is a disturbing increase in anti-Semitism and anti-Muslim sentiment in 

a number of countries in the region, manifested as physical assaults and verbal 

harassment; hate speech over the internet; and vandalism of cemeteries, 

synagogues, mosques, community centers, and monuments. In January, Amedy 

Coulibaly killed four Jewish hostages and critically injured four others at a kosher 

supermarket in Paris. According to media reports citing survivors of the siege, 

Coulibaly was explicit about wishing to kill Jews. In several countries, openly 

anti-Semitic, nationalistic political parties have gained seats in parliaments, with 

government officials and elected members of parliaments at times responsible for 

anti-Semitic statements and acts. Acts of anti-Semitism persisted among far-right 

organizations; various groups continued to commemorate World War II fascist 

leaders. Political parties opposing Muslim immigration drew support.
42

Bans on Kosher/Halal slaughter exist in several European countries, while 

there are increasing calls for bans or restrictions on circumcision, particularly in 

the Nordic countries. Both circumcision and Kosher/Halal slaughter are religious 

practices for Jews and Muslims, as well as some other religious groups. 

The Russian government uses its anti-extremism law to justify raids, arrests, 

and bans on religious literature of peaceful, “non-traditional” minority religious 

groups, including readers of Muslim theologian Said Nursi, Jehovah’s Witnesses, 

Scientologists, Falun Gong practitioners, and some Protestant groups.

Voluntary Repatriation

The international community continues to support efforts to create favorable 

conditions for the return of ethnic minorities to their homes in the Balkans. In June 

2006, Serbian, Kosovo, and UN authorities signed the Protocol on Voluntary and 

Sustainable Return to Kosovo, which sought to improve the conditions for return 

by focusing on three elements: ensuring the safety of returnees, returning property 

to the displaced and rebuilding their houses, and creating an overall environment 

that sustains returns. There is still much work to be done in ensuring that those 

hoping to return have the means to do so.

PRM supported the return process through a grant to Danish Refugee 

Council in FY 2015 and to the International Organization of Migration in FY2016 

that promoted sustainable return through income-generation activities including 

vocational training and the provision of agricultural inputs, as well as community 

development projects to facilitate inter-ethnic dialogue. International funding 

continues to facilitate and sustain the return and reintegration of displaced 

minorities from Kosovo. The Regional Housing program will allow thousands of 

returns to take place in Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Montenegro. 

The program will encourage both voluntary repatriation and local integration as 

durable solutions. 

Local Integration

UNHCR has led efforts to create viable asylum systems and effective legal 

protections for refugees in the Balkans, the Russian Federation, the South 

Caucasus and Central Asia. However, ineffective implementation of these laws, 

combined with the history of national animosities and xenophobia throughout the 

region, often makes effective local integration difficult for ethnic minority 

refugees. In Azerbaijan, a majority of refugees lack legal status, despite being 

recognized by UNHCR and permitted by the government to stay in the country. 

As such, refugees do not have access to legal employment, making local 

integration in Azerbaijan extremely difficult. In Russia, difficulties in acquiring 
43

citizenship remain for some former Soviet citizens who resided in Russia before 

1992 and are, under Russian law, entitled to Russian citizenship. Members of 

groups such as Meskhetian Turks have been unable to obtain Russian citizenship 

and thus remain stateless.

In Russia, UNHCR focuses on quality-assurance measures to strengthen the 

national asylum system, including access to the asylum system at borders, and 

measures contributing to the Government’s plans to bring its reception 

infrastructure and processes up to international standards. In Montenegro, the path 

to citizenship has been particularly slow for those displaced from Kosovo. The 

Regional Housing Program should provide an easier path to local integration for 

some of the most vulnerable, including members of Roma populations, among this 

group. The Government of Serbia is implementing local integration programs for 

refugees from Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia and the displaced persons from 

Kosovo.

Third-Country Resettlement 

The United States continues to accept refugees from the region. The vast 

majority are members of religious minorities from former Soviet Union countries 

who are adjudicated under the reduced evidentiary standards of the Lautenberg 

Amendment. While Jews comprised an average of 85 percent of the applicant pool 

in the early 1990s, Evangelical Christians now make up over 90 percent of the 

applicant pool. Around 70 percent of the Lautenberg caseload is from Ukraine. 

Jewish immigration to Israel from the region continues under the United Israel 

Appeal Program.

In addition to Lautenberg cases, the United States also accepts small 

numbers of UNHCR referrals from Russia and Central Asian countries and 

approximately 500 UNHCR-referred individuals from Malta each year. In an 

effort to continue processing refugees trapped in DHS-inaccessible countries such 

as Iran, Eritrea, and Yemen, the United States transfers UNHCR-referred cases of 

Afghans, Somalis, and a variety of other African nationality refugees to UNHCR 

Emergency Transit Centers (ETCs) in Timisoara, Romania and Humenne, Slovakia 

for U.S. resettlement processing. Although limited by the number of bed space 

available (200 beds in Timisoara and 250 in Humenne), the USRAP makes steady 

use of the ETCs. (Note: these refugees are not counted against the Europe and

Central Asia ceiling, but against the region that includes the country of origin of 

each refugee.) 
44

FY 2016 U.S. Admissions

In FY 2016 the United States plans to admit an estimated 4,000 refugees 

from Europe and Central Asia, the majority of whom are Lautenberg religious 

minority cases. Applicants are being processed in Almaty, Baku, Bishkek, 

Dushanbe, Kyiv, Valletta, Minsk, Tbilisi, Moscow, Timisoara, and Humenne.

FY 2017 U.S. Resettlement Program

The proposed FY 2017 ceiling for refugees from Europe and Central Asia is 

4,000 individuals. Priority 2 includes individuals from countries of the former 

Soviet Union who will be adjudicated under the reduced evidentiary standards of 

Lautenberg Amendment guidelines. Applications for the Lautenberg program 

have increased substantially since the outbreak of conflict in Ukraine.

Proposed FY 2017 Europe and Central Asia program to include arrivals from 

the following categories: 

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 90

Priority 2 Groups 3,900 

Priority 3 Family Reunification 10 

Total Proposed Ceiling 4,000

LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN 

In 2015, the number of refugees, asylum seekers, IDPs, and other persons of 

concern in Latin America and the Caribbean surpassed seven million. The ongoing 

conflict in Colombia generates the largest numbers of refugees and IDPs in the 

region, and the second largest world-wide. The Government of Colombia (GOC) 

reports 6.6 million IDPs as of February 2016. Despite an expanded state presence 

and improved security in cities and towns throughout Colombia, displacement 

continues. According to official government statistics, between January 2013 and 

August 2015, approximately 15,000 people were forcibly displaced per month -

about 480,000 people in total. The main causes of displacement were 

confrontations between the GOC and illegal armed groups, including the 

Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), the National Liberation Army 

(ELN), criminal gangs (BACRIM) and criminal narco-trafficking networks, as well 

as landmines, extortion, and forced recruitment of children into armed groups. 
45

In surrounding countries, including Ecuador, Venezuela, Costa Rica, and 

Panama, there are over 400,000 Colombian asylum seekers and refugees and the 

number continues to rise. Ecuador has the highest number of recognized 

Colombian refugees and asylum seekers in Latin America. As of December 2015, 

the Government of Ecuador (GOE) had recognized over 62,000 refugees and 

UNHCR reports an additional 180,000 persons of concern. The asylum process in 

Ecuador is slow and difficult to access, while the approval rate is around six 

percent. The GOE administers the pre-admissibility step in addition to the refugee 

status determination (RSD) process, which creates additional delays. Asylum 

seekers pending RSD can wait several years for a decision. UNHCR highlights a 

challenging protection environment in Ecuador for refugees, citing delays in 

registration, revocations of refugee status, labor exploitation, xenophobia and 

discrimination. Other countries in the region, such as Costa Rica, Venezuela, the 

Dominican Republic, and Panama, also have established asylum procedures, but 

the registration and determination procedures are often implemented ineffectively. 

UNHCR is working with these countries, including Ecuador, to improve their 

asylum processes.

In Panama, most of the 17,000 recognized refugees and over 18,000 persons 

of concern as of November 2015 were Colombians. After more than a decade of 

ineffective handling of the temporary humanitarian protection status holders (PTH) 

situation, Panama’s Office for Assistance to Refugees (ONPAR) delivered 

permanent resident documentation to most PTH holders in March 2014. As of late 

2015, in Costa Rica, there are 16,623 recognized refugees and 8,000 of persons of 

concern to UNHCR. The recognition rate for asylum applications increased from 

7.5 percent in 2014 to almost 30 percent in 2015. Decisions in asylum cases in 

Costa Rica can take up to a year, though asylum seekers have the right to work 

while they are waiting for a decision. UNHCR reported in December 2015 that 

there are 5,000 recognized refugees in Venezuela, and UNHCR estimates there are 

more than 200,000 persons, mostly Colombians, live in a refugee-like situation in 

the country. As of mid-2014 in Brazil, there were almost 6,000 recognized 

refugees from 75 countries; the largest numbers are from Colombia and the 

Democratic Republic of Congo.

Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala face extreme violence, including 

sexual and gender-based violence, severe economic inequality and social 

exclusion, and widespread corruption and poverty, compelling many people to flee 

their homes each year. These factors, as well as the desire to reunify with family 

members residing in the United States and seek economic opportunities in the 

United States, contributed to an unprecedented number of unaccompanied children 

and families with young children arriving in the United States in 2014.
46

Religious Freedom

In Latin America and the Caribbean, religious freedom is widely recognized 

and supported by government and society, though there are cases of religious 

intolerance. In some isolated instances, Christian groups, mainly Evangelicals, 

Protestants, and Mormons have reported impediments or complications to their 

practice of religion, establishment of religious institutions, and importation of 

religious materials. In some areas, there is harassment of Muslims, anti-Muslim 

speech, and marginalization of Afro and indigenous religions. In Cuba, significant 

government restrictions remain in place.

Although the constitution protects religious freedom, the Government of 

Cuba continues to monitor aspects of religious life, including interference in 

church affairs, surveillance of religious institutions, and harassment of outspoken 

church leaders. The USRAP in Havana offers Cubans who have been persecuted 

on a number of grounds, including their religious beliefs, the opportunity for 

permanent resettlement in the United States.

Priests and other religious leaders in some parts of Mexico continued to be 

targeted and received extortion attempts, death threats, and intimidation, often 

from organized criminal groups. There are also reports of local leaders pressuring 

Protestants to convert through forced displacement, arbitrary detention, and 

destruction of property in some rural and indigenous communities.

Manifestations of anti-Semitism that occurred throughout the hemisphere at 

times appeared correlated to the unfolding transitions to democracy in other parts 

of the world. In Venezuela, anti-Semitism is a growing concern, including 

instances of anti-Semitism in the government-controlled media.

Voluntary Repatriation

Given the threats and violence in Colombia from illegal armed groups (nonstate actors) and the lack of state presence to provide full protection in some areas, 

UNHCR has not been actively promoting repatriation of Colombian refugees.

Local Integration 

The Governments of Costa Rica, Ecuador, Panama, and Venezuela have 

maintained policies that theoretically allow Colombians in need of protection to 

obtain asylum and integrate locally, although the processes involved are usually 

slow and cumbersome. The governments' capacity to review applications and 

confer refugee status remains limited. Even registered refugees with the right to 

work in these countries struggle to find stable employment or income 
47

opportunities, competing with the large number of poor in host communities. 

Colombians seeking international protection face high levels of discrimination and 

xenophobia, and the ability to locally integrate is difficult. Furthermore, refugees 

do not live in camps, but rather the large majority live in urban areas. Some 

Colombian persons of concern (including refugees and asylum seekers) in 

Ecuador, Costa Rica, Panama, and Venezuela continue to experience harassment 

by persons associated with armed Colombian groups operating in these countries. 

Security remains a major concern for the Government of Panama, and 

Panamanians often equate refugees with drug trafficking and crime.

The Department of State is currently supporting UNHCR’s efforts to assist 

the Dominican Republic and other Caribbean countries in developing systems for 

conducting refugee status determinations for asylum seekers, including Haitians. 

UNHCR’s office in the Dominican Republic and its continued presence in Haiti 

have contributed greatly to its ability to address the protection needs of refugees, 

asylum-seekers, and displaced and stateless persons in mixed migration flows 

throughout the region. Despite Dominican Republic restarting its refugee 

eligibility committee (CONARE) in 2012, the asylum process remains 

dysfunctional. We also remain concerned that individuals are at risk of 

statelessness in the Dominican Republic due to the September 2013 Constitutional 

Tribunal ruling.

Third Country and In-Country Resettlement 

In the past, local integration had been the solution best suited to regional 

refugee problems in Latin America. In recent years, however, third-country 

resettlement has become an important alternative for those who face physical risks 

and have urgent protection needs. Canada, New Zealand, Sweden, Denmark, 

Norway, and the United States offer resettlement to at-risk Colombian refugees. 

Currently, the United States accepts referrals from UNHCR and embassies in the 

region and processes these cases principally in Ecuador, with occasional cases in 

Costa Rica and other countries throughout the region. Under the “Solidarity 

Resettlement Program,” a component of the Mexico Plan of Action which sought 

regional solutions to the Colombian refugee issue, countries in the region including 

Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Uruguay are working with UNHCR to resettle a 

modest number of Colombian refugees. The United States also facilitates the 

resettlement to third countries of persons interdicted by the U.S. Coast Guard in the 

Caribbean or who enter Guantanamo Naval Station directly and are found by 

DHS/USCIS to have a well-founded fear of persecution or to be more likely than 

not to face torture if repatriated to their country of origin. From 1996 to date, 

approximately 412 such protected persons have been resettled to 20 countries 

worldwide.
48

The U.S. government also operates an in-country refugee resettlement 

program in Cuba. The number of persons seeking refugee resettlement has 

decreased, and the backlog of cases pending review by the Department of State for 

access to the USRAP has been eliminated. The decrease in new applications 

reflects a shrinking pool of qualified applicants. The Refugee Section at the U.S. 

Embassy has not received any recent information regarding individuals who have 

been prevented by the Cuban government from traveling through the in-country 

refugee settlement program.

Cubans eligible to apply for admission to the United States through the incountry program include the following:

1. Former political prisoners;

2. Active members of persecuted religious minorities;

3. Human rights activists, long-standing members;

4. Forced labor conscripts (1965-68); and

5. Persons deprived of their professional credentials or subjected to other 

disproportionately harsh or discriminatory treatment resulting from their 

perceived or actual political or religious beliefs.

On December 1, 2014, PRM and DHS/USCIS launched the Central 

American Minors (CAM) program, an in-country refugee program in El Salvador, 

Guatemala, and Honduras for unmarried children under 21 of certain lawfully 

present parents residing in the United States. If the second parent is resident in the 

country of origin with the child and is married to the parent who is resident in the 

United States, that parent can also be considered for resettlement, but would have 

to establish an independent refugee claim. The U.S. government established the 

program to provide a safe, legal, and orderly alternative to the dangerous journey 

that some children are currently undertaking to join their parents in the United 

States. To apply, an eligible parent who is lawfully present in the United States

must complete the Affidavit of Relationship (AOR, Form DS-7699) with the 

assistance of a State Department-funded resettlement agency. Applicants found by 

DHS/USCIS to be at a risk or harm but not eligible for refugee resettlement are

considered on a case-by-case basis for parole. Unlike refugee status, parole is 

temporary and does not confer any permanent legal immigration status or path to 

permanent legal immigration status in the United States.

On July 26, 2016 the White House announced the expansion of refugee 

processing and access to resettlement in the United States for vulnerable 

individuals from Central America, in partnership with UNHCR. The CAM 

program will expand to allow additional categories of applicants when these family 

members accompany a qualified child: sons and daughters of a U.S.-based lawfully 
49

present parent who are 21 years or older and/or married; in-country biological 

parent of the qualified children; and caregivers of qualified children who are also 

related to the U.S.-based lawfully present parent.

DHS/USCIS and the State Department also continue to work on expansion 

of refugee processing in Central America beyond the CAM program. The 

Government of Costa Rica announced a protection transfer arrangement (PTA) 

with the UNHCR and IOM. Through UNHCR and IOM, the USG will pre-screen 

vulnerable Salvadoran, Honduran, and Guatemalan applicants and will transfer 

applicants most in need of immediate protection to Costa Rica, where they will 

undergo refugee processing before being interviewed by DHS/USCIS and 

considered for resettlement to the United States. For cases not requiring immediate 

transfer to Costa Rica, an in-country referral program will be established to 

interview certain cases for refugee protection.

FY 2016 U.S. Admissions

We anticipate admitting approximately 1,500 refugees from Latin America 

and the Caribbean during FY 2016, including Central American minors, 

Colombians, and Cubans. Historically, most Cuban admissions were former 

political prisoners and forced labor conscripts. The program was expanded in 1991 

to include human rights activists, displaced professionals, and others with claims of 

persecution, which currently compose the majority of admissions.

FY 2017 U.S. Resettlement Program

The proposed 5,000 ceiling for Latin America and the Caribbean for FY 

2017 comprises Cuban refugees eligible for the in-country Priority 2 program; 

Central American Minors eligible for the in-country Priority 2 program; UNHCRreferred Priority 1 Colombians and Central Americans; as well as a small number 

of Priority 3 family reunification cases.

Proposed FY 2017 Latin America program to include arrivals from the following 

categories: 

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 950

Priority 2 Groups 4,000

Priority 3 Family Reunification 50

Total Proposed Ceiling 5,000
50

NEAR EAST AND SOUTH ASIA

The Near East/South Asia region remains host to more than 12 million 

refugees, primarily Palestinians, Syrians, Afghans, Iraqis, Somalis, Burmese, 

Bhutanese, Sri Lankans, and Tibetans. Countries hosting the largest populations of 

refugees are Turkey, Pakistan, Lebanon, Iran, and Jordan. Few countries in the 

region are party to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and/or 

its 1967 Protocol. Nonetheless, many host governments tolerate the presence of 

refugees within their borders.

UNHCR, UNRWA, ICRC, IOM, WFP, UNICEF, and other humanitarian 

organizations work with refugees in the region. Some countries have provided 

long-term protection and/or asylum, mainly to Tibetans, Bhutanese, Sri Lankans, 

Palestinians, Afghans, Iraqis, Somalis, Syrians, and a handful of other nationalities. 

Refugees identified by UNHCR for third-country resettlement include Iraqis in 

Jordan, Syria, Turkey, Lebanon, Egypt, Yemen, and the Gulf States; Bhutanese in 

Nepal; Afghans in Pakistan, Iran, Turkey, Syria, and India; and Iranians in Turkey.

As of December 31, 2015, nearly 222,000 Iraqi refugees were registered 

with UNHCR in the region. IOM reports that more than 3.4 million Iraqis have 

been displaced since January 2014 by violence in Iraq. As of March 2016, there 

are nearly 250,000 Syrian refugees in Iraq, as well as approximately 30,000 

refugees and asylum seekers of other origins (including Palestinians and Iranian 

Kurds). The U.S. government is providing humanitarian assistance to internally 

displaced Iraqis and refugees from Iraq throughout the region through support to 

international and non-governmental organizations. U.S. funding seeks to ensure 

conflict-affected Iraqis receive shelter, water, sanitation, health care, protection, 

and education. Since the start of Fiscal Year 2014, the United States has provided 

nearly $915 million in essential humanitarian assistance.

Intense fighting in Syria has caused massive displacement, both internally 

and to countries in the region. Inside Syria, 13.5 million Syrians require 

humanitarian assistance, and 6.5 million are internally displaced. Nearly 4.6 

million Syrians are living in areas that are besieged or difficult to reach. Some 

440,000 people, and perhaps many more, remain vulnerable due to continued 

combat between and among Syrian regime forces and allies of the Syrian 

government and various anti-regime armed groups, such as the Islamic State of 

Iraq and the Levant. Outside of Syria, neighboring countries are hosting 4.8 

million refugees. Hospitals are filled to capacity, schools are running double 

shifts, the availability of water has decreased, and housing rents are rising in 

communities hosting Syrians. The crisis in Syria and its spillover effects have

pushed the number of Lebanese living below the extreme poverty line ($2.40 per 
51

day) to 404,000. The number of poor Lebanese and refugees in Lebanon has risen 

by an estimated 110 percent since 2011. Meanwhile, Turkey has spent 

approximately $10 billion to support refugees, through construction and services in 

high-quality camps and other support to non-camp communities. Jordan is also 

making significant outlays and will require $8 billion between 2016 and 2018 to 

meet refugee needs and strengthen Jordanian communities.

The U.S. government is providing humanitarian assistance to internally 

displaced Syrians and refugees from Syria across the region through support to 

international organizations, such as UNHCR, UNICEF, UNRWA, UNFPA, IOM, 

ICRC, and WFP, as well as through non-governmental organizations, which are 

providing critical assistance in virtually all sectors, including water and sanitation, 

shelter, education and medical care. The U.S. government, the single largest 

global donor, had provided nearly $5.6 billion in critical humanitarian assistance 

since the start of the Syria crisis.

Despite the voluntary repatriation of over 5.8 million Afghan refugees since 

2002, Pakistan and Iran continue to host, respectively, approximately 1.5 million 

and 950,000 registered Afghans, many of whom have resided in these countries for 

over three and a half decades. The maintenance of asylum and protection space for 

those refugees who cannot yet return to Afghanistan while continuing to support 

voluntary repatriation, is a top priority for the U.S. government and for UNHCR. 

In addition to Afghan refugees, some 2-3 million Afghans are believed to live and 

work in Pakistan and Iran as economic migrants without documentation. Over 

11,000 Afghan refugees and asylum seekers are also registered with UNHCR in 

India. Identifying durable solutions remains an important component of UNHCR’s 

strategy in India. Local integration in South Asia remains a difficult option due to 

opposition from most host countries.

Tens of thousands of ethnic Nepali Bhutanese were forced out of Bhutan in 

the early 1990s as a result of the Bhutanese government’s policy of “one nation 

and one people” (also referred to as “Bhutanization”). Despite 17 rounds of formal 

negotiations between Bhutan and Nepal, and pressure from the United States and 

other governments to resolve the issue and secure the right of return for Bhutanese 

refugees, particularly humanitarian cases, to date none have been permitted to 

return. Due to concerted resettlement efforts commenced in late 2007 by the 

United States and other resettlement countries, over 102,000 Bhutanese refugees 

have departed after spending two decades in camps in eastern Nepal; of whom 

more than 86,000 have resettled in the United States. The U.S. government 

continues to press the Government of Bhutan to help resolve this protracted 

situation by accepting the return of eligible refugees who wish to voluntarily 

repatriate. Similarly, the U.S. government encourages the Government of Nepal to
52

allow the projected 10,000-12,000 refugees who will remain in the camps 

following the conclusion of third country resettlement to work, gain legal status, 

and access public education, health care, and other services.

Religious Freedom

Persecution of religious groups is common in many countries in the Near 

East and South Asia that are countries of origin for refugee populations entering 

the United States. State and local government responses to violence against 

members of religious groups, particularly Muslims and Christians, are often 

inadequate. Although many of these countries do not have Jewish populations, 

anti-Semitism is prevalent, and often espoused by governments or religious 

leaders.

In Afghanistan, religious freedom is limited due to constitutional 

contradictions, legislative ambiguity, and interpretations of Islamic law that punish 

apostasy and blasphemy.

In Pakistan, the penal code includes blasphemy laws that carry punishments 

ranging from imprisonment to the death penalty. Frequent abuses of these laws 

negatively affect religious minorities, both Muslims and non-Muslims. In 2014, 12 

new cases were registered under the blasphemy law, and the courts sentenced at 

least three people to death, six people to life-imprisonment, and three people to 

two-year jail terms, and acquitted one person for committing blasphemy. The 

government has yet to carry out a death sentence for blasphemy. Nevertheless, at 

least 17 people are awaiting execution for blasphemy, and at least 20 others are 

serving life sentences.

In Sri Lanka, religious tensions continue to be a problem, and Muslim, 

Hindu, and Buddhist communities often distrust one another. In 2014, under the 

previous government, local authorities failed to respond effectively to communal 

violence, including attacks on members of minority religious groups, and 

perpetrators were not brought to justice. In June 2014 at least three Muslims were 

killed and scores injured in clashes with hardline Buddhists in Aluthgama and 

Beruwalla. The incident occurred after the Bodu Bala Sena, a hardline violent 

ethnic Sinhala Buddhist organization with links to the previous government, held a

large rally in the streets of Aluthgama. Non-governmental organizations alleged 

that senior and local government officials provided assistance to or, at a minimum, 

tacit support for the actions of societal groups targeting religious minorities.
53

In Bhutan, Buddhism is the state’s “spiritual heritage,” although in the 

southern areas many citizens openly practice Hinduism. There is subtle pressure 

on non-Buddhists to observe the traditional Buddhist values and some limitations 

on constructing non-Buddhist places of worship remain. Some societal pressures 

toward non-Buddhists are reflected in official and unofficial efforts to uphold the 

“spiritual heritage” (Buddhism) of the country.

In Iran, religious groups, including Sunni Muslims, Baha’is, Sufis, Jews, 

Zoroastrians, Yaresanis, and Christians, continue to face official discrimination, 

harassment, and arrest. Members of the Shia community who express religious 

views different from those of the government are also subject to harassment and 

intimidation. The government continues convictions and executions of dissidents, 

political reformists, and peaceful protesters on the charge of moharebeh (enmity 

against God), anti-Islamic propaganda, and other religion-related charges, which it 

often links to national security.

In Iraq, the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) targeted many of its 

attacks and abuses on the basis of religious and ethnic identity. On March 17, 

2016, Secretary Kerry announced that, in his judgment, ISIL is responsible for 

genocide against groups in areas under its control, including Yezidis, Christians, 

and Shia Muslims. He also said that ISIL is responsible for crimes against 

humanity and ethnic cleansing directed at these same groups and in some cases 

also against Sunni Muslims, Kurds, and other minorities. Ongoing sectarian 

tensions and discrimination affect all of Iraq’s religious and ethnic communities. 

As a result, some of these religious communities, along with their ancient 

languages and customs, are on the verge of disappearing.

In Syria, the Assad regime increased its targeting and surveillance of 

members of a variety of faith groups it deemed a threat, especially members of the 

country’s Sunni majority. This occurred concurrently with the escalation of 

violent extremist activity targeted against religious minorities, including 

Christians, Druze, Alawites, Yezidis, and others as the civil war continues. Largescale internal and external displacement of all sectors of the population is ongoing.

In Lebanon, the constitution requires the state to respect all religious groups 

and declares equality of rights and duties for all citizens without discrimination or 

preference, and stipulates that there be a balance of political power among the 

major religious groups. Sectarian violence, including attacks by ISIL, al-Nusra, 

and other extremist groups, increased significantly during 2015, straining relations 

among the country’s 18 officially-recognized religious groups. Despite the rise in 

violence, political and religious leaders have been vocal in their opposition to 

violent extremism and in their support of peaceful coexistence across sectarian 

divides. Religious group identity remains a significant element of social 
54

interaction and cultural expression, and places of worship continue to exist in 

relative peace and security. Relationships among individual members of different 

religious groups are generally amicable, with some exceptions.

In Turkey, some religious minority communities, including Alevis, face 

difficulties owning property, registering places of worship, and gaining exemptions 

from compulsory Sunni Islamic instruction. Faith-based conscientious objectors in 

Azerbaijan, Turkey, and Turkmenistan are sometimes arrested and prosecuted for 

failing to comply with laws mandating military service.

In some countries in the region, most notably Afghanistan, Iran, Saudi 

Arabia, Pakistan, and Egypt, blasphemy and defamation of religion laws are used 

to restrict religious liberty, constrain the rights of religious minorities, and limit 

freedom of expression, and those accused face prison sentences and threats of 

violence. In most countries in the region, Sharia courts decide personal status 

cases, which generally forbid conversion by Muslims. Iran and Saudi Arabia are 

designated by the Department of State as CPCs under the International Religious 

Freedom Act of 1998 for systematic, ongoing, and egregious violations of religious 

freedom.

The USRAP provides resettlement access in various ways to refugees who 

suffer religious persecution. Nationals of any country, including CPCs, may be 

referred to the USRAP through a Priority 1 referral by UNHCR or a U.S. embassy 

for reasons of religious persecution. Under the Lautenberg-Specter Amendment, 

Iranian religious minorities designated as Priority 2 category members are 

considered under a reduced evidentiary standard for establishing a well-founded 

fear of persecution.

Voluntary Repatriation

Since 2002, over 5.8 million Afghan refugees have returned to Afghanistan, 

mostly from Pakistan and Iran. Over 4.7 million have been assisted by UNHCR in 

the largest repatriation operation in UNHCR’s history. Despite a slight increase in 

2015 due to pressures placed on refugees in Pakistan, the era of mass returns has 

largely ended Returned refugees represent roughly 20 percent of Afghanistan’s 

total population and overwhelm the country’s capacity to absorb them.

It is unlikely that all of the remaining 2.5 million registered Afghans in 

Pakistan and Iran will repatriate in the near future. UNHCR and IOM report the 

continuing migration of Afghans in both directions across the AfghanistanPakistan border is part of a larger process of economic and social migration that 

has been occurring for centuries. UNHCR is working with the Governments of 

Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iran and the international community to develop 
55

policies and programs to sustain voluntary returns. They are also working to better 

manage the residual Afghan population in Pakistan by working toward longer-term 

protection and migration solutions. IOM is seeking a greater role in border 

management and in developing regional mechanisms for economic migration that 

would bolster protection for Afghans. The Government of Afghanistan is working 

to increase its capacity in helping returnees fold back into Afghan economic and 

social structures and at the same time prioritizes continued protection for Afghan 

citizens still seeking refuge abroad. UNHCR, together with the Governments of 

Afghanistan, Iran, and Pakistan, continue to work toward implementing UNHCR’s 

Solutions Strategy for Afghan Refugees to Support Voluntary Repatriation, 

Sustainable Reintegration and Assistance to Host Countries (SSAR). The SSAR 

provides for the orderly, voluntary return of Afghan refugees and emphasizes the 

need to reintegrate returned refugees into their communities fully.

Stabilizing the displaced Afghan population – e.g., reintegrating returning 

refugees and IDPs into Afghan society and preserving asylum space for refugees in 

neighboring countries – is critical to regional stability, as is addressing irregular 

migration. The Afghan government has also adopted a national IDP policy which 

seeks to address protection, assistance, and durable solutions for displaced 

populations within its borders. With assistance from UNHCR and others, the 

Afghan government began implementing the IDP policy in 2015.

The United States continues to work with other interested governments in 

urging the Government of Bhutan to allow for the voluntary repatriation of 

Bhutanese refugees to Bhutan under acceptable terms and conditions. With the 

end of the conflict in Sri Lanka in 2009, nearly 13,000 refugees have returned with 

UNHCR assistance. However, the number of Tamils seeking to return from India 

has decreased. So far in 2016, UNHCR assisted in the voluntary return of 163 

Tamil refugees to Sri Lanka.

Local Integration 

The SSAR promotes enhancing support for refugee-hosting communities 

and providing some alternative stay arrangements for refugees in Afghanistan and 

Iran. While some progress is being made, few countries in the region offer local 

integration to refugees. In July 2013, the Government of Pakistan endorsed the 

policies found in the National Policy on Management and Repatriation of Afghan 

Refugees beyond 30th June, 2013. At the same meeting, the Cabinet extended the 

validity of Afghan Proof of Registration cards and the Tripartite Agreement 

(among the governments of Afghanistan and Pakistan and UNHCR) until 

December 31, 2015. As part of the Pakistan implementation of the SSAR and in 

partnership with the Government of Pakistan and UN agencies, UNHCR launched 

the Refugee-Affected and Hosting Areas (RAHA) initiative in 2009. This program 
56

is widely regarded as a success in addressing Afghan refugee and Pakistani host 

community needs by rehabilitating areas that have been adversely affected by the 

presence of Afghan refugee communities over the past 30 years. The United States 

will continue to work with UNHCR and the Government of Pakistan to preserve 

asylum space and promote alternative stay arrangements. However, at present, 

local integration is not an option for most of the Afghan refugees.

Local integration is currently not an option for Iraqi refugees who settled in 

the region, though Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon have preserved first asylum and 

protection space for Iraqi refugees. Syria hosted approximately 22,000 UNHCRregistered Iraqi refugees as of December 31, 2015. Jordan and Lebanon host 

approximate 53,000 and 17,000 Iraqi refuges respectively. Both countries closely 

manage their borders, requiring Iraqis to obtain visas before entering, which 

effectively limits the number of Iraqis able to seek asylum as not all are able to 

secure visas.

Iraqis in Syria, Lebanon and Jordan are not legally defined as refugees, but 

rather as guests or, in the case of Jordan, asylum seekers. These governments 

allow UNHCR to register Iraqis. With help from the international community, the 

governments of Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan have allowed Iraqi students to enroll in 

public schools, though they are often required to pay fees, which may be 

prohibitively expensive for refugees without international assistance, and 

enrollment numbers are low. Similarly Iraqi refugees in Syria, Lebanon and 

Jordan have access to the public health care systems, but are required to pay fees to 

access services. Refugees in Lebanon and Syria are not legally allowed to work, 

though many do so in the grey economy. Although Iraqis, like all foreigners in 

Jordan, can work legally in several labor sectors, few have obtained the necessary 

work permits because these require possession of residency permits, which the 

GOJ is not issuing to Iraqis.

With the incredible rise in the number of displaced since January 2014 and 

the continuing violence throughout Iraq, many Iraqi IDPs will not be able to return 

to their home communities in the near future. While it is still too soon to seek 

local integration support, it is important for displaced Iraqis to be able to access 

services in their areas of displacement.

While Turkey ratified the 1951 UN Refugee Convention and acceded to its 

1967 Protocol, the Turkish government acceded to the Protocol with a geographic 

limitation acknowledging refugees only from Europe. While nearly all asylum 

seekers are thus not considered refugees under Turkish law, the Turkish 

government grants temporary refuge and temporary local integration possibilities 

to refugees recognized by UNHCR usually pending their referral to a potential 

resettlement country. As of March 2016, there were over 250,000 refugees, as well 
57

as those pre-registered and registered with UNHCR Turkey, the majority from Iraq 

and Afghanistan. UNHCR-recognized refugees and asylum seekers in Turkey are 

assigned to one of 64 satellite cities. Provincial governments are responsible for 

meeting refugees’ basic needs, including by providing access to employment, 

healthcare, and education, although support varies from one location to another. 

The 2.7 million Syrians that Turkey hosts are not counted under these regulations 

as they are afforded temporary protection status instead of conditional refugee 

status. 

Turkey’s “Foreigners and International Protection Law” regulates the entry, 

exit, and the stay of migrants in the country, along with the scope of international 

protection for those who seek asylum in Turkey. The law went into full 

implementation on April 11, 2014, creating a new entity within the Ministry of 

Interior, the Directorate General for Migration Management (DGMM). DGMM is 

responsible for implementing most aspects of the law, including temporary 

protection registration and exit permit issuance. DGMM continues to build up 

staff size and capacity, expand its regional scope, and refine roles and 

responsibilities with other Turkish agencies in emergency response for refugees. 

In January 2015, DGMM passed a regulation allowing Syrian refugees to work 

officially. Employers must apply to the Ministry of Labor for work permits and 

there are restrictions such as refugees must work in the province where they are 

registered, must have lived in Turkey for more than six months, and company staff 

cannot be more than 10 percent Syrian. The effect of these restrictions is that very 

few Syrian refugees are working legally in Turkey.

Despite the increasing number of asylum seekers and refugees, India does 

not have a clear national policy for the treatment of refugees, and UNHCR has a 

limited mandate in the country. India permits UNHCR to assist asylum seekers 

and urban refugees in New Delhi and other cities, primarily Burmese, Afghans, 

and Somalis. UNHCR-recognized asylum seekers and urban refugees are eligible 

to apply for long-term visas that, if granted, are renewable for five years, provide 

work authorization and access to higher education and public services. India 

recognizes and aids certain groups, including Sri Lankan refugees in the 112 camps 

in Tamil Nadu and Tibetan refugees in the 39 settlements and other urban areas 

throughout the country. The Government of India provides support and benefits to 

registered Tibetan and Sri Lankan refugees. It also grants work authorization and 

other rights to documented Tibetans. However, Sri Lankan refugees in India do 

not receive work authorization from the central government but have authorization 

from the state government to work in the state of Tamil Nadu.
58

Third-Country Resettlement

The USRAP anticipates the continued large-scale processing of Syrians and 

Iraqis, and, to a lesser extent, Bhutanese, Afghans and Iranians, during FY 2017.

In the Near East, the United States recognizes that the possibility of thirdcountry resettlement must be available to the most vulnerable Iraqi and Syrian 

refugees, and has processing facilities in Amman, Baghdad, Beirut, Cairo, Erbil, 

and Istanbul. The U.S. Embassy in Syria is shuttered and interviews are not 

currently taking place in Damascus.

In late 2013, UNHCR announced its intention to refer 30,000 Syrian 

refugees for resettlement in third countries by the end of 2014 and, as noted above, 

referred nearly 36,000 in 2015. UNHCR is on track to meet its goal of referring up 

to 100,000 additional Syrian refugees by the end of 2016. The United States is 

playing a significant role in this effort. The majority of Syrian referrals will be 

processed in Jordan, Turkey, and Egypt, and to a lesser extent in Lebanon and 

Erbil, the Kurdistan region of Iraq, and elsewhere. As of late June 2016, UNHCR 

had referred over 48,000 Syrians for U.S. resettlement consideration. In FY 2015, 

the United States admitted 1,682 Syrian refugees and aims to admit at least 10,000 

in FY 2016. With UNHCR’s decision to significantly increase Syrian referrals for 

resettlement, the United States is ramping up processing operations in Jordan, 

Turkey, and Egypt in FY 2017.

The United States has been resettling Iraqis in large numbers since 2007. 

While many Iraqis gain access to the USRAP via a referral from UNHCR, direct 

access to the USRAP for Iraqis with close U.S. affiliations is also available in a 

limited number of countries in the region. The Refugee Crisis in Iraq Act, enacted 

January 28, 2008, created categories of Iraqis who are eligible for direct access 

(Priority 2) to the USRAP, both inside and outside Iraq. Individuals who meet the 

following criteria may seek direct access to USRAP in Algeria, Bahrain, Egypt, 

Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Morocco, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and 

the United Arab Emirates: 

1. Iraqis who work/worked on a full-time basis as interpreters/translators for 

the U.S. Government, MNF-I in Iraq, or U.S. Forces-Iraq; 

2. Iraqis who are/were employed by the U.S. Government in Iraq; 

3. Iraqis who are/were employees of an organization or entity closely 

associated with the U.S. mission in Iraq that has received U.S. 

Government funding through an official and documented contract, award, 

grant or cooperative agreement;
59

4. Iraqis who are/were employed in Iraq by a U.S.-based media organization 

or non-governmental organization; and 

5. Spouses, sons, daughters, parents, and siblings of individuals described in 

the four categories above, or of an individual eligible for a Special 

Immigrant Visa as a result of his/her employment by or on behalf of the 

U.S. Government in Iraq, including if the individual is no longer alive, 

provided that the relationship is verified.

In addition to the above, the Refugee Crisis in Iraq Act provides direct 

access to the USRAP to Iraqis who have close family members in the United 

States, which has been defined as beneficiaries of approved I-130 Petition for 

Alien Relative petitions, as well as to their derivatives.

Refugee processing in Iraq remains a high priority for the United States, as it 

directly benefits Iraqis associated with U.S. efforts in Iraq. Although security and 

logistical challenges associated with operating in Iraq limit in-country processing 

capacity, both the RSC and DHS/USCIS interviews in Baghdad in mid-2015.

In February 2016, direct access (Priority 2) to the USRAP was extended to 

Syrian beneficiaries of approved I-130 Petition for Alien Relatives and their 

derivatives. Processing is available in Algeria, Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, 

Kuwait, Lebanon, Morocco, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab 

Emirates.

Since the United States is unable to conduct refugee resettlement directly 

from Iran, we partner with the Government of Austria to allow for certain Iranian 

religious minority applicants (Baha’is, Zoroastrians, Jews, Mandaeans, and 

Christians) to travel from Iran to Austria for their U.S. resettlement processing. 

These refugees are considered under a reduced evidentiary standard for 

establishing a well-founded fear of persecution granted by the Lautenberg-Specter 

Amendment. The Amendment was reauthorized December, 18 2015, allowing 

new applications to be filed and adjudicated under the reduced evidentiary 

guidelines. In Turkey, the United States also processes Iranian religious minorities 

(primarily Baha’i) through special procedures involving a “fast-track” refugee 

status determination and referral by UNHCR.

Resettlement processing for Bhutanese refugees in Nepal is continuing 

smoothly and the United States remains committed to considering for resettlement 

all Bhutanese refugees who expressed interest to UNHCR by June 30, 2014. As of 

April 20165, UNHCR had referred over 115,000 Bhutanese refugees for 

resettlement to eight countries and more than 102,000 of these Bhutanese refugees 

have been resettled to these countries – over 86,000 resettled in the United States –

since late 2007. Processing of Bhutanese refugees who have declared interest in 

resettlement will conclude within two years.
60

In India, UNHCR refers some 400 individuals per year, with priority given 

to those it deems most vulnerable. The majority of referrals are Burmese. 

UNHCR also refers a very limited number of refugees out of Sri Lanka, mostly 

Pakistanis. We continue to explore modalities for processing vulnerable Tibetan 

refugees in the region.

FY 2016 U.S. Admissions

We estimate the admission of approximately 38,000 refugees from the 

region in FY16. These will include up to15,000 Iraqis, 13,000 Syrians, 6,000

Bhutanese, 4,000 Iranians, and approximately 500 Afghans, including Afghan 

refugees in Iran processed through UNHCR Emergency Transit Centers in 

Slovakia and Romania.

FY 2017 U.S. Resettlement Program

The proposed regional ceiling for refugees from the Near East and South 

Asia for FY 2017 is 40,000, including vulnerable Syrians, Iraqis, Bhutanese, 

Iranians, Pakistanis, and Afghans. We expect Priority 1 UNHCR referrals for all 

of the aforementioned nationalities, including individuals from various and diverse 

religious and ethnic groups in the region, such as Assyrians, Mandeans, Iranian 

Kurds, Syrian Kurds, and Ahmadi Muslims. Many Iraqis, Syrians, and Iranians 

will also access the USRAP through specific Priority 2 programs.

Proposed FY 2017 Near East/ South Asia program to include arrivals from the 

following categories: 

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 19,000

Priority 2 Groups 20,900

Priority 3 Family Reunification 100

Total Proposed Ceiling 40,000
61

DOMESTIC IMPACT OF REFUGEE ADMISSIONS

In FY 2015, the USRAP admitted 69,933 refugees from 59 countries. More 

than half were originally from either Burma or Iraq. (See Table III.)

The demographic characteristics of refugee arrivals from the 20 largest 

source countries (representing close to 100 percent of total arrivals) in FY 2015 

illustrate the variation among refugee groups. The median age of all FY 2015 

arrivals was 25 years and ranged from 20 years for arrivals from Burundi, Central 

African Republic, Dem. Republic of Congo, and Somalia to 37 years of age for 

arrivals from Cuba and Iran. In FY 2015, 47.68 percent of all arriving refugees 

were female and 52.33 percent of all arriving refugees were male. Males 

predominated among refugees from Palestine (57.6 percent), Burundi (55.3 

percent), and Pakistan (54.1percent). (See Table IV.)

Of the total arrivals in FY 2015, some 11.3 percent were under the age of 

five, 28.2 percent were of school age, 61.6 percent were of working age, and 2.7 

percent were of retirement age. (See Table V.) Considerable variation among 

refugee groups can be seen among specific age categories. Refugees under the age 

of five ranged from a high of 15.5 percent among Burma arrivals to a low of 2.2 

percent of those from Iran. The number of school-aged children (from five to 17 

years of age) varied from a high of over 47.4 percent of arrivals from Rwanda to a 

low of 11.7 percent of those from Iran. The number of working-aged refugees (16 

to 64 years of age) varied from a high of 78.2 percent of those from Iran to a low 

of 50.5 percent of individuals from Burundi. Retirement-aged refugees (65 years 

or older) ranged from a high of 10.5 percent of arrivals from Iran to a low of less 

than one percent of those from Pakistan.

During FY 2015, 61 percent of all arriving refugees resettled in 12 states. 

The majority were placed in Texas (10.7 percent), followed by California (8.2 

percent), New York (5.8 percent), Arizona (4.5 percent), Michigan (4.3 percent), 

and Ohio (4.3 percent). The states of Georgia (4.1 percent), Pennsylvania (4 

percent), Illinois (3.8 percent), Washington (3.8 percent), Florida (3.5 percent), and 

North Carolina (3.5 percent) also were in the top twelve states where refugees were 

resettled. (See Table VI.)
62

TABLE III

Refugee Arrivals By Country of Origin

Fiscal Year 2015

Country of Origin Arrival Number % of Total

Afghanistan 910 1.30%

Angola 5 0.01%

Bangladesh 3 0.00%

Bhutan 5,775 8.26%

Burma 18,386 26.30%

Burundi 1,186 1.70%

Cameroon 8 0.01%

Central African Republic 270 0.39%

Chad 16 0.02%

China 30 0.04%

Colombia 521 0.74%

Congo 52 0.07%

Cuba 1,527 2.18%

Dem. Rep. Congo 7,876 11.26%

Djibouti 2 0.00%

Ecuador 1 0.00%

Egypt 13 0.02%

Equatorial Guinea 2 0.00%

Eritrea 1,596 2.28%

Ethiopia 626 0.90%

Former Soviet Union* 2,362 3.38%

Gambia 3 0.00%

Guinea 3 0.00%

India 1 0.00%

Indonesia 3 0.00%

Iran 3,109 4.45%

Iraq 12,676 18.13%
63

Ivory Coast 28 0.04%

Jamaica 1 0.00%

Jordan 2 0.00%

Kenya 3 0.00%

Korea, North 15 0.02%

Kuwait 4 0.01%

Lebanon 3 0.00%

Liberia 12 0.02%

Mali 4 0.01%

Nambia 1 0.00%

Nepal 26 0.04%

Netherlands 1 0.00%

Nigeria 4 0.01%

Pakistan 159 0.23%

Palestine 99 0.14%

Rep. of South Sudan 79 0.11%

Rwanda 173 0.25%

Saudi Arabia 3 0.00%

Senegal 4 0.01%

Sierra Leone 6 0.01%

Somalia 8,858 12.67%

South Africa 2 0.00%

Sri Lanka (Ceylon) 89 0.13%

Sudan 1,578 2.26%

Syria 1,682 2.41%

Togo 1 0.00%

Tunisia 7 0.01%

Turkey 2 0.00%

Uganda 67 0.10%

Vietnam 35 0.05%

Yemen 16 0.02%
64

Zimbabwe 7 0.01%

TOTAL 69,933 100.00%

Source: Department of State, Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration, Refugee Processing Center
65

TABLE IV

Median Age and Gender of Refugee Arrivals, Fiscal Year 2015

Rank

(# of 

Arrivals

) Country of Origin

Refugees

Admitted

Median

Age

%

Females

%

Males

1 Burma 18,386 23 44.71% 55.28%

2 Iraq 12,676 26 47.01% 52.99%

3 Somalia 8,858 20 49.36% 50.63%

4 Dem. Rep. Congo 7,876 20 50.47% 49.53%

5 Bhutan 5,775 29 50.35% 49.64%

6 Iran 3,109 37 50.56% 49.43%

7 Former Soviet Union* 2,362 28 50.08% 49.91%

8 Syria 1,682 21 47.44% 52.55%

9 Eritrea 1,596 21 47.99% 52.00%

10 Sudan 1,578 22 47.08% 52.91%

11 Cuba 1,527 37 46.95% 53.04%

12 Burundi 1,186 20 46.45% 53.54%

13 Afghanistan 910 23 48.79% 51.20%

14 Ethiopia 626 23 46.80% 53.19%

15 Colombia 521 24 51.24% 48.75%

16 Central African Republic 270 20 48.14% 51.85%

17 Rwanda 173 22 48.55% 51.44%

18 Pakistan 159 24 45.91% 54.08%

19 Palestine 99 28 42.42% 57.57%

20 Sri Lanka (Ceylon) 89 27 47.19% 52.80%

21 All Other Countries 475 26 42.10% 57.68%

TOTAL 69,933 25 47.68% 52.33%

Source: Department of State, Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration, Refugee Processing Center
66

TABLE V

Select Age Categories of Refugee Arrivals, Fiscal Year 2015

Rank

(# of 

Arrivals) Country of Origin

Under 5 

Yrs

School 

Age 

(5-17)

Working 

Age

(16-64)

Retirement 

Age

(=or > 65)

1 Burma 15.55% 23.74% 62.48% 1.24%

2 Iraq 10.83% 25.64% 62.64% 3.62%

3 Somalia 12.57% 35.36% 55.59% 0.96%

4 Dem. Rep. Congo 10.15% 40.50% 53.82% 1.32%

5 Bhutan 7.87% 22.21% 68.65% 5.00%

6 Iran 2.18% 11.70% 78.22% 10.51%

7 Former Soviet Union* 9.44% 26.50% 62.23% 5.08%

8 Syria 14.44% 37.21% 51.42% 1.36%

9 Eritrea 7.83% 36.71% 62.53% 0.43%

10 Sudan 11.21% 35.80% 56.08% 1.07%

11 Cuba 3.99% 18.46% 70.92% 10.15%

12 Burundi 13.65% 39.29% 50.50% 1.51%

13 Afghanistan 5.49% 34.83% 66.37% 1.20%

14 Ethiopia 13.09% 23.00% 66.29% 0.79%

15 Colombia 7.29% 30.13% 66.41% 0.76%

16 Central African Republic 12.22% 38.88% 53.33% 1.11%

17 Rwanda 5.20% 47.39% 58.96% 0.57%

18 Pakistan 8.80% 27.04% 66.03% 0.00%

19 Palestine 4.04% 30.30% 65.65% 4.04%

20 Sri Lanka (Ceylon) 7.86% 23.59% 67.41% 3.37%

21 All Other Countries 6.52% 25.26% 72.63% 0.21%

TOTAL 11.34% 28.25% 61.60% 2.67%

NOTE: Totals may exceed 100 percent due to overlapping age categories.

Source: Department of State, Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration, Refugee Processing Center
67

TABLE VI

Refugee Arrivals By State of Initial Resettlement, Fiscal Year 2015

STATE

Refugee 

Arrivals

Amerasian 

Arrivals

Total

Arrivals

% of 

Total Arrivals 

to U.S.

Alabama 105 0 105 0.15%

Alaska 146 0 146 0.21%

Arizona 3,133 0 3,133 4.48%

Arkansas 13 0 13 0.02%

California 5,718 0 5,718 8.18%

Colorado 1,730 0 1,730 2.47%

Connecticut 519 0 519 0.74%

Delaware 9 0 9 0.01%

District of Columbia 5 0 5 0.01%

Florida 2,478 2 2,480 3.55%

Georgia 2,889 0 2,889 4.13%

Hawaii 7 0 7 0.01%

Idaho 935 0 935 1.34%

Illinois 2,658 0 2,658 3.80%

Indiana 1,793 0 1,793 2.56%

Iowa 783 4 787 1.13%

Kansas 741 0 741 1.06%

Kentucky 1,990 0 1,990 2.85%

Louisiana 135 0 135 0.19%

Maine 425 0 425 0.61%

Maryland 1,508 0 1,508 2.16%

Massachusetts 1,688 0 1,688 2.41%

Michigan 3,012 0 3,012 4.31%

Minnesota 2,288 3 2,291 3.28%

Mississippi 15 0 15 0.02%

Missouri 1,431 0 1,431 2.05%

Nebraska 1,200 0 1,200 1.72%

Nevada 610 0 610 0.87%

New Hampshire 446 0 446 0.64%

New Jersey 314 0 314 0.45%
68

STATE

Refugee 

Arrivals

Amerasian 

Arrivals

Total

Arrivals 

% of 

Total Arrivals 

to U.S.

New Mexico 207 0 207 0.30%

New York 4,052 0 4,052 5.79%

North Carolina 2,475 0 2,475 3.54%

North Dakota 497 0 497 0.71%

Ohio 2,989 0 2,989 4.27%

Oklahoma 479 0 479 0.68%

Oregon 1,029 0 1,029 1.47%

Pennsylvania 2,764 0 2,764 3.95%

Rhode Island 185 0 185 0.26%

South Carolina 226 0 226 0.32%

South Dakota 484 0 484 0.69%

Tennessee 1,530 0 1,530 2.19%

Texas 7,479 0 7,479 10.69%

Utah 1,109 0 1,109 1.59%

Vermont 312 0 312 0.45%

Virginia 1,312 0 1,312 1.88%

Washington 2,621 4 2,625 3.75%

West Virginia 31 0 31 0.04%

Wisconsin 1,415 0 1,415 2.02%

Total 69,920 13 69,933 100.00%

Note: Arrival figures do not reflect secondary migration.

Source: Department of State, Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration, Refugee Processing Center
69

TABLE VII

ESTIMATED AVAILABLE FUNDING FOR REFUGEE PROCESSING AND RESETTLEMENT

FY 2016 AND FY 2017 ($ MILLIONS)

AGENCY

ESTIMATED

FY 2016

AVAILABILITY

(BY DEPARTMENT)

ESTIMATED 

FY 2017

AVAILABILITY(BY 

DEPARTMENT)

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

United States Citizenship and Immigration Services

 Refugee Processing 1

 $50.0 $67.8

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration

 Refugee Admissions 2, 3

$656.6 $634.5

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Administration for Children and Families,

Office of Refugee Resettlement

 Refugee Resettlement 4

 $720.9 $841.9

ESTIMATED TOTAL AVAILABILITIES $1,427.5 $1,544.2

1

FY 2016: Includes cost factors to reflect Headquarters facilities rent related to the refugee 

resettlement program, projected staffing enhancements, and following-to-join refugee 

processing, in addition to certain ICASS costs. 

2

FY 2016: Includes FY 2016 Migration and Refugee Assistance (MRA) appropriation of $462.7 

million, $70 million in Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance (ERMA) funding, $44.5 

million in PRM carryover from FY 2015, $64.4 million in projected IOM loan 

collections/carryover, and an estimate of $15 million in prior year MRA recoveries. A portion of 

these funds will be carried forward into FY 2017.

3 FY 2017: Includes FY 2017 MRA budget request of $567.5 million, $61 million in projected 

IOM loan collections/carryover, and an estimate of $6 million in prior year MRA recoveries. 

Additional funds carried forward from FY 2016 will be available in FY 2017. 

4

FY 2016 and FY 2017: HHS’s Office of Refugee Resettlement’s (ORR) refugee benefits and 

services are also provided to asylees, Cuban and Haitian entrants, certain Amerasians from 

Vietnam, victims of a severe form of trafficking who have received certification or eligibility 

letters from ORR, and certain family members who are accompanying or following to join 

victims of severe forms of trafficking, and some victims of torture, as well as Iraqi and Afghan 

Special Immigrants and their spouses and unmarried children under the age of 21. The estimated 

funding for these groups is included here. However, none of these additional groups is included 

in the refugee admissions ceiling except Amerasians. This category does not include costs 

associated with the Unaccompanied Children’s Program, Temporary Assistance for Needy 

Families (TANF), Medicaid, Supplemental Security Income programs, or the Victims of 

Trafficking. These estimates do not include any prior year carryover funding. The estimated FY 

2017 figures above reflect the President’s FY 2017 Budget request.
70

TABLE VIII 

UNHCR Resettlement Statistics by Resettlement Country CY 2015 Admissions

RESETTLEMENT 

COUNTRY TOTAL

PERCENT OF TOTAL

RESETTLED

United States 52,583 64.21%

Canada 10,236 12.50%

Australia 5,211 6.36%

Norway 2,220 2.71%

Germany 2,097 2.56%

Sweden 1,808 2.21%

United Kingdom 1,768 2.16%

Finland 964 1.18%

New Zealand 756 .92%

France 700 .85%

Switzerland 664 .81%

Austria 642 .78%

Denmark 486 .60%

Albania 483 .59%

Netherlands 428 .52%

Belgium 276 .34%

Ireland 178 .22%

Italy 96 .12%

Spain 92 .11%

Luxembourg 49 .06%

Rep. of Korea 42 .05%

Portugal 39 .05%

Japan 19 .02%

Liechtenstein 17 .02%

Belarus 14 .02%
71

Iceland 13 .02%

Brazil 6 .01%

Hungary 2 .00%

Romania 2 .00%

Poland 2 .00%

TOTAL 81,893 100.00%

Resettlement country figures (submissions and departures) may not match UNHCR reported 

figures as resettlement country figures may include submissions received outside of UNHCR 

auspices. UNHCR figures may also include cases in which UNHCR did not submit but assisted, 

i.e. obtaining exit permits for humanitarian admissions or family reunion.