PROPOSED REFUGEE ADMISSIONS

FOR

FISCAL YEAR 2016

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 2016: 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 

re-affirmed our nation’s commitment to helping refugees and our leading 

role in providing safe haven. This commitment comes at a time when the 

global community faces an unprecedented crisis of displacement. There 

are currently more refugees, asylum-seekers, and internally displaced 

persons – nearly 60 million – than at any time since World War II. The 

United States leads the world in providing humanitarian aid to crises from 

which innocent people flee and also is the top destination for refugees 

recommended for resettlement by the UN refugee agency (UNHCR).

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 start again. 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 Remains Strong

In FY 2015, the Administration aims to reach the ceiling of 70,000 refugee 

arrivals established by the President. The program is on target to do this, despite 

safety concerns that halted refugee interviews in Baghdad for more than ten 

months; more than 10,000 Iraqi refugees are expected to come to the United 

States in 2015. Since 2007, more than 120,000 Iraqis have been resettled via the 

refugee program, including at least 38,000 who were affiliated with the United 

States by family ties or employment. FY 2015 also saw other events that slowed 

the pace of arrivals, such as the earthquake in Nepal, challenges staging 

interviews of refugees in hard-to-reach or insecure places, and occasional foreign 

government reluctance to approve departures. Nonetheless, concerted refugee 

processing efforts will mean that USRAP will likely reach the FY 2015 ceiling. 

For example, we had estimated that 17,000 refugees would arrive from Africa in 

2015 but now expect to exceed that number by several thousand. More refugees 

will come to the United States from Africa this year than in any year since 2005. 
iii

Reflective of our commitment to offer safe 

haven to even more refugees, the Administration 

is proposing an increase in the FY 2016 ceiling to 

85,000. This will require cooperation among 

several US government agencies, including close 

interagency coordination on security checks to 

ensure refugee cases are scrutinized thoroughly 

and still processed efficiently. As a public-private 

partnership, it will also require the support of 

American non-governmental organizations, 

charities, faith-based groups and thousands of 

volunteers and supporters of the program in 

hundreds of communities across the country. In 

honor of World Refugee Day, the White House 

celebrated the courage and resilience of those who 

flee violence and persecution, and the dedication 

of those individuals who provide protection and 

assistance to refugees abroad and ensure a warm 

reception for them here in the United States at a 

White House Champions of Change event held on 

June 25, 2015. 

Syrian Resettlement

The refugee crisis caused by the conflict in 

Syria is the worst the world has witnessed in a 

generation, with more than 4 million refugees in 

the region. The U.S. government is deeply 

committed to assisting the Syrian people and is 

providing more than $4.5 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 

Administration is committed to increasing Syrian 

resettlement in 2016 and beyond. The United 

States is one of 28 countries that have agreed to 

accept referrals from UNHCR as part of its 

ambitious international effort to secure permanent or temporary resettlement for 

130,000 Syrian refugees by the end of 2016. As of mid-2015, UNHCR has 

“Tomorrow, on World Refugee Day, 

we will pause to reflect on the millions 

around the world who have been 

displaced from their homes—the 

hardships they face, the courage and 

resilience they demonstrate, and the 

dedication of those who come to their 

aid.

This year’s commemoration comes as 

worldwide displacement reaches 

record levels, with nearly 60 million 

people uprooted by wars, violence, 

and persecution. From Syria to Iraq, 

from Burma to Burundi, from South 

Sudan to eastern Ukraine, the number 

of displaced and vulnerable has 

escalated. The struggles of some are 

captured in searing images—of people 

waiting at border crossings, housed in 

endless lines of tents, and crammed 

into rickety boats at sea—while those 

of others, crowded into the shadows of 

large cities, may go unobserved. 

As the largest global donor of 

humanitarian aid, the United States 

supports programs that provide food, 

water, shelter, and medical care to 

refugees and other displaced 

persons. We thank the aid workers 

who deliver this assistance, sometimes 

at great personal risk, and we offer our 

gratitude to the many families who 

open their homes to those in need. All 

the while, we express our appreciation 

for the millions of men and women 

who, having endured the struggles of 

displacement, have contributed so 

much to the life of this Nation.

President Barack Obama

June 19, 2015

In commemoration of World Refugee Day
iv

referred more than 15,000 Syrian refugees to the 

United States and these individuals are being 

screened to determine whether they are eligible. 

We expect to admit some 1,600-1,800 Syrian 

refugees in FY 2015. In FY 2016, we project we 

will admit at least 10,000 Syrians. 

In-Country Processing in Central America

In December 2014, the Administration 

established an in-country refugee and parole 

program for children in El Salvador, Guatemala, 

and Honduras. If their parents are lawfully present 

in the United States, the parents may file to bring 

their unmarried children under 21 to join them in 

this country. As of August 2015, parents have 

submitted nearly 3,000 applications and children 

are being interviewed to determine their eligibility. 

Because the majority of applications were received 

from May-to-July, very few such minors will be 

admitted to the United States in FY 2015. We 

expect a modest, yet increasing number of 

admissions in FY 2016. The Departments of State 

and Homeland Security continue to inform eligible 

parents in the Central American community about 

the new program, through the media, community 

meetings and conference calls, and are exploring 

ways to broaden outreach.

Improvements to Global Resettlement

Our efforts to convince more nations to 

resettle refugees continue to pay dividends. In 

recent years, countries without a history of 

resettling refugees have stepped forward and 

established programs. The list includes Switzerland, which has announced a 

regular resettlement program, and Japan, which has announced that its pilot 

program will become permanent next year. In 2014, a total of 28 countries 

resettled refugees that had been identified and referred by UNHCR. Most of 

these countries have agreed to accept Syrian refugees referred by UNHCR. A 

number of other countries without regular resettlement programs have also 

stepped forward to admit Syrians through humanitarian admissions programs. 

It’s almost unfathomable that nearly 60 

million men, women, and children are 

now displaced inside and outside of 

their countries. That is the largest 

number the United Nations High 

Commissioner for Refugees has ever 

counted and 8 million more than the 

record set just one year ago. We’ve seen 

haunting images of Syrian families 

fleeing indiscriminate barrel bombings 

and young children rescued at sea after 

days without food. Escaping from 

bullets, bombs, or machetes is often just 

the beginning of the ordeal. Refugees 

remain in exile for an average of 17 

years. Some are born and grow up in 

camps and never get to leave them.

I’ll never forget meeting with refugee 

leaders on my recent trip to Kenya, 

where 350,000 mainly Somali refugees 

live in a remote, dusty camp complex 

called Dadaab. By video link to 

Nairobi, I spoke to a group of Dadaab’s 

best students. They told me how they 

dream of attending university and 

pursuing careers in medicine, politics, 

and human rights. But they also shared 

their fears that they would end up 

trapped and jobless, and that all their 

striving would be in vain. We cannot 

let that happen.

Secretary John Kerry

June 18, 2015

In commemoration of World Refugee Day
v

For several years the U.S. government has provided targeted financial 

support to UNHCR in order to boost resettlement globally. For example, in the 

Great Lakes region of Africa UNHCR has been able to hire more staff. They in 

turn have been able to refer more refugees to more countries. The United States 

has also funded two new facilities for holding interviews that all countries can use 

to screen refugees from the region. 

Great Lakes Core Group

In 2013, UNHCR and the United States established the Congolese Core 

Group, designed to leverage UNHCR’s newly announced large-scale resettlement 

initiative for refugees from the Democratic Republic of the Congo located in 

other Great Lakes region countries (Burundi, Rwanda, Tanzania, and Uganda). 

The United States has chaired this group and, in addition to resettlement, 

spearheaded other initiatives to help larger numbers of Congolese refugees. 

In 2015, the group was renamed the Great Lakes Core Group in recognition 

that refugees of other nationalities in the four main hosting countries should also 

benefit from the multinational group’s work. Current activities include pursuing 

local integration for 15,000 long-staying refugees in Uganda and exploring ways 

to build on the resettlement of some 30,000 Congolese from Tanzania. 

Combatting Fraud and Ensuring National Security in the Refugee Admissions 

Program

The USRAP is committed to deterring and detecting fraud among those 

seeking to resettle in the United States and continues to employ the most rigorous 

security measures possible to protect against threats to our national security. 

In 2015, we took additional measures to protect the refugee admissions 

program against fraud. The Department of State has issued updated guidelines 

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

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

data, and communicate with applicants. The U.S. government also continues to 

work with UNHCR and other resettlement countries to safeguard refugee referral 

data by improving registration procedures and enhancing electronic screening of 

registration data to detect identity fraud. We also note the importance of working 

closely with refugee hosting countries in those places where the host country, and 

not UNHCR, registers refugees.

Refugee applicants of all nationalities are also required to undergo 

background security checks. Security checks include biographic name checks for 

all refugee applicants and biometric (fingerprint) checks for refugee applicants. 
vi

Refugee applicants must clear all required security checks prior to final approval 

of their application. 

Protecting the Health of Refugees and U.S. Communities

In recent years, the Department of State and the Centers for Disease 

Control and Prevention (CDC) have collaborated to develop and implement a 

comprehensive pre-departure vaccination program for U.S.-bound refugees to 

protect the health of refugees and the U.S. public. In coordination with the 

International Organization for Migration, the program is fully implemented in six 

countries and partially implemented in two countries. To date, more than 88,000 

refugees have been vaccinated with 315,000 vaccines administered. More than 

half of the refugees admitted in FY 2015 benefitted from the program. In 

addition to the health benefits, pre-departure vaccines also prevent delays in the 

resettlement process during overseas outbreaks of diseases such as measles. The 

Administration will continue to look for opportunities to expand the program to 

additional locations overseas.

Ensuring a Suitable Welcome

In FY 2015, to maintain quality reception and placement services for 

arriving refugees, the Department of State continued to guarantee resettlement 

agencies a minimum level of funding for their operations, even during lulls 

caused when the numbers of refugees arriving in the United States dip or referrals 

are delayed. This policy ensures that staff and services will be available when 

needed. The Department expects to continue this practice in FY 2016.

Benefits and services for refugees include the Reception and Placement 

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

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

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

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

become economically self-sufficient, and integrate into American society. The 

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

receiving refugees so that they are prepared to welcome them and know about 

programs and services that are available to them. Over the past year, the State 

Department and Department of Health and Human Services have consulted with 

groups in Georgia, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, North 

Carolina, Ohio, South Carolina, Texas, Vermont, and Virginia. HHS/ORR’s 

newly established regional offices have increased engagement and consultation 

with those who have a stake in the resettlement program. In November 2014, 

President Obama created a formal interagency body, the White House Task Force 

on New Americans, which aims to strengthen integration efforts nationwide and 
vii

build welcoming communities for all immigrants, including refugees. The 

Administration will continue to explore ways of sustaining a strong federal-statecommunity partnership and ensuring that refugees can integrate successfully. 

Planning for the Future

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

to the United States, we are simultaneously bringing to a close longstanding 

resettlement programs for Burmese in Thailand and Bhutanese in Nepal. In 2015 

the cases of some 6,000 remaining priority two (P-2) eligible Burmese in 

Thailand were processed.2 We are processing the cases of the approximately 

12,000 Bhutanese refugees who will depart Nepal over the next two years before 

operations there are reduced. 

In a number of places, we continue to face challenges carrying out the 

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

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

applicants for several years. Some applicants in Yemen, Iran, and Eritrea were 

moved to a UNHCR Emergency Transit Center in Romania or Slovakia as an 

intermediate step, but space limitations mean that relatively small numbers are 

able to benefit from this option. In Iraq, Lebanon, and Kenya, security concerns 

have hampered our ability to process cases. We are constantly reviewing our 

operations to find efficient and creative ways to interview applicants in remote 

locations in Africa. This may include setting up interviewing facilities and health 

clinics so that interviews can be conducted nearby and refugees do not have to be 

transported long distances. 

In these and other ways, the program will adapt to stay strong while 

meeting changing needs. With the support of Congress and the American people, 

refugee resettlement will continue to be a proud American tradition for many 

years to come. 

 

2

Priority Two or P-2 refugees belong to a group of special humanitarian concern identified by the U.S. refugee program. 
viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction i

Foreword ii

I. OVERVIEW OF U.S. REFUGEE POLICY 1

II. REFUGEE ADMISSIONS PROGRAM FOR FY 2016 5

Proposed Ceilings 5

Unallocated Reserve 6

Admissions Procedures 6

Eligibility Criteria 6

Priority 1: Individual Referrals 7

Priority 2: Group Referrals 8

FY 2016 Priority 2 Designations 9

Priority 3: Family Reunification Cases 11

FY 2016 Priority 3 Nationalities 13

Following to Join Reunification Cases 14

DHS/USCIS Refugee Adjudications 15

The Eligibility Determination 15

Background Checks 16

Processing Activities of the Department of State 17

Overseas Processing Services 17

Cultural Orientation 17

Transportation 19

Reception and Placement (R&P) 19

Office of Refugee Resettlement 20

III. REGIONAL PROGRAMS 23

Africa 24

Religious Freedom 25

Voluntary Repatriation 26

Local Integration 28

Third-Country Resettlement 29

FY 2015 U.S. Admissions 29

FY 2016 U.S. Resettlement Program 30
ix

East Asia 32

Religious Freedom 34

Voluntary Repatriation 36

Local Integration 36

Third-Country Resettlement 36

FY 2015 U.S. Admissions 37

FY 2016 U.S. Resettlement Program 37

Europe and Central Asia 38

Religious Freedom 40

Voluntary Repatriation 41

Local Integration 42

Third-Country Resettlement 42

FY 2015 U.S. Admissions 43

FY 2016 U.S. Resettlement Program 43

Latin America and the Caribbean 43

Religious Freedom 45

Voluntary Repatriation 45

Local Integration 46

Third and In-Country Resettlement 46

FY 2015 U.S. Admissions 48

FY 2016 U.S. Resettlement Program 48

Near East and South Asia 49

Religious Freedom 51

Voluntary Repatriation 53

Local Integration 54

Third-Country Resettlement 57

FY 2015 U.S. Admissions 59

FY 2016 U.S. Resettlement Program 59

IV. DOMESTIC IMPACT OF REFUGEE ADMISSIONS 61
x

LIST OF TABLES

Page

I. Refugee Admissions in FY 2014 and FY 2015, 

Proposed Refugee Admissions by Region for FY 2016 5

II. Proposed FY 2016 Regional Ceilings by Priority 23

III. Refugee Arrivals by Country of Origin, FY 2014 62

IV. Median Age and Gender of Refugee Arrivals, FY 2014 65

V. Select Age Categories of Refugee Arrivals, FY 2014 66

VI. Refugee Arrivals by State of Initial Resettlement, FY 2014 67

VII. Estimated Funding of Refugee Processing, Movement, and 

Resettlement FY 2015 and FY 2016 69

VIII. UNHCR Resettlement Statistics by Resettlement Country, 

CY 2014 70
1

I. OVERVIEW OF U.S. REFUGEE POLICY 

At the end of 2014, the estimated refugee population worldwide stood at 

19.5 million, with 14.4 million under the mandate of the United Nations High 

Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). This represents an increase of 2.7 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 2014, some 126,800 refugees voluntarily 

repatriated to their country of origin – the lowest recorded number since 1983. 

Refugee repatriation operations brought refugees home to Afghanistan, Cote 

d’Ivoire, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), and Sri Lanka. These 

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

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

countries. 

Where opportunities for return remain elusive, the United States and 

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

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

governments to protect refugees and allow them to integrate into local 

communities. The State Department further promotes local integration by 

funding programs to enhance refugee self-sufficiency and support communitybased social services. Groups that 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 
2

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.

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

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

recognized citizenship in any country, many stateless persons exist in refugee-like 

situations, unable to access benefits or services and denied protections. The 

United States has supported UNHCR’s efforts to prevent and reduce statelessness, 

including encouraging States to address gaps in citizenship laws and eliminate

provisions that discriminate against women, and by promoting fair application of 

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

prevent and address statelessness in Burma, the Dominican Republic, Cote 

d’Ivoire, Nepal, Sudan, 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 refugees protection and/or durable 

solutions in some particularly difficult cases. 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 constructing facilities. As a result, UNHCR has substantially 

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

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

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

NGOs to refer refugee applicants to the program.

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

number of countries active in resettlement. In 2014, UNHCR referred refugees to 

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

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

Argentina, Belarus, Brazil, Chile, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, 
3

Germany, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Lichtenstein, Luxembourg, 

Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Romania, 

Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Uruguay, and the United Kingdom. 

While the overall number of refugees referred by UNHCR and the 

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

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

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

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

resettled in 2014, 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 $1.28 billion in FY 2014. 

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

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

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

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

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

defuse regional tensions. 

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

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

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

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

former Yugoslavia) and began to admit refugees representing over 50 

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

Homeland Security’s U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) are 

often conducted in remote locations and are focused on members of populations 

in greatest need of third country resettlement opportunities.

While maintaining the United States’ leadership role in humanitarian 

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

opportunities go 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 the most rigorous security measures 

possible 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 thirty to ninety 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 leadership, technical assistance, and 

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

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

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

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

recently arrived refugees. Moreover, upon arrival, refugees are potential 

Americans in waiting. Refugees are immediately eligible for lawful employment,

and after one year are required to apply for adjustment of status to that of lawful 

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

lawful permanent resident status is eligible to apply for citizenship.

To strengthen the integration of refugees and immigrants and ensure that 

all community members have the tools and opportunities to fully contribute to the 

nation, in November 2014 President Obama created the White House Task Force 

on New Americans, comprised of 16 Federal departments, agencies, and White 

House offices. In April 2015, the Task Force submitted to President Obama a 

strategic action plan to better integrate refugees and immigrants into American 

communities through a series of recommendations to support civic, economic, 

and linguistic integration. Under this plan, federal agencies are taking actions 

such as extending competitive grant funding for citizenship preparation programs 

in communities across the country, and providing information and tools to 

employers about increasing access to ESL courses, education services, and other 

training programs for immigrant and refugee workers. 

A number of factors create challenges for resettlement agencies striving to 

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

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

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

to improve overseas cultural orientation, including thorough curricula review and 

teacher training. In 2013, the Department of State determined after two pilot 

rounds of English language training (ELT) for some refugees in Kenya, Thailand, 

and Nepal that the classes provided basic English competency and promoted

continued language learning after arrival in the United States. As a result, since 

2014 the Department has funded the Resettlement Support Center for Africa to 

provide ELT to some Congolese prior to resettlement in the United States. 
5

REFUGEE ADMISSIONS PROGRAM FOR FY 2016

PROPOSED CEILINGS

TABLE I

REFUGEE ADMISSIONS IN FY 2014 AND FY 2015

PROPOSED REFUGEE ADMISSIONS BY REGION FOR FY 20163

REGION

FY 2014

ACTUAL 

ARRIVALS

FY 2015

CEILING

REVISED FY

2015 CEILING

FY 2015

PROJECTED 

ARRIVALS

PROPOSED 

FY2016

CEILING

Africa 17,476 17,000 20,400 22,600 25,000

East Asia 14,784 13,000 17,300 18,200 13,000

Europe and Central Asia 959 1,000 2,300 2,350 4,000

Latin America/Caribbean 4,318 4,000 2,300 2,050 3,000

Near East/South Asia 32,450 33,000 27,700 24,800 34,000

Regional Subtotal 69,987 68,000 70,000 70,000 79,000

Unallocated Reserve 2,000 6,000

Total 69,987 70,000 70,000 70,000 85,000

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

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

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

however, the President may specify circumstances under which individuals who 

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

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

2016 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).

 

3

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

Refugee Admissions Program elements.
6

Unallocated Reserve

This proposal includes 6,000 unallocated admissions numbers to be used if 

needed for additional refugee admissions from any region. The unallocated 

numbers would only be used following notification to Congress.

ADMISSIONS PROCEDURES

Eligibility Criteria

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

accordance with a determination made by the President after appropriate 

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

United States for the purpose of refugee resettlement consideration is determined 

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

categories of cases:

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

circumstances and apparent need for resettlement;

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

by virtue of their circumstances and apparent need for resettlement;

 Priority 3 – Individual cases from designated nationalities granted 

access for purposes of reunification with 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.)

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

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

or is admissible to the United States under the INA. Applicants who are eligible 
7

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

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

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

in the INA and various security protocols. 

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

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

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

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

processing priorities, they all undergo the same processing steps. 

PRIORITY 1 – INDIVIDUAL REFERRALS

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

nationality4, usually with compelling protection needs, for whom resettlement 

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

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

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

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

Some NGOs providing humanitarian assistance in locations where there are large 

concentrations of refugees have also undergone training by PRM and 

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

Process for Priority 1 Individual Referral Applications

Priority 1 referrals from UNHCR and NGOs are submitted to the 

appropriate Regional Refugee Coordinator, who forwards the referrals to the 

appropriate Resettlement Support Center (RSC) for case processing and 

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

embassy referrals for completeness and may consult with DHS in considering 

these referrals. 

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

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

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

Security (DHS/USCIS) concur. 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.

 

4

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

may be granted access to the USRAP. 
8

PRIORITY 2 – GROUP REFERRALS

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

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

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

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, normally upon the recommendation of 

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

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

characteristics is the reason 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 

specified criteria to establish eligibility for access.

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

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

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

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

minorities, Iraqis with links to the United States, and minors from El Salvador, 

Guatemala, and Honduras with lawfully present parents in the United States. 

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

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

whether individual applicants qualify for access and should be presented to 
9

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 bio data of eligible refugee 

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

situations in which the intensive labor required to generate individual 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 Rwanda. Predefined group 

referrals with clear, well-defined eligibility criteria and several methods for crosschecking 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 P-1, 

including individual pre-screening and USCIS interviews, and all security and 

medical checks. 

FY 2016 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 2016, 

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 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. 
10

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. 

Minors in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras

Under this Priority 2 program, certain lawfully present parents in the United 

States can request access to a refugee interview for an unmarried child under 21 

in his/her country of origin. 

Groups of Humanitarian Concern outside the Country of Origin 

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

undergoing processing with significant arrivals anticipated during FY 2015. 

(Additional Priority 2 groups may be designated over the course of FY 2016.)

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

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

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

Ethnic Minorities from Burma in Malaysia

Under this Priority 2 designation, 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. 
11

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 existing Priority 2 designation, certain Congolese refugees in Rwanda 

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

are eligible for processing. 

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.

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 
12

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).

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

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

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

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

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

30, we have received more than 3,700 AORs that are in various stages of 

processing. 

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. 
13

Under certain circumstances, a qualifying 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.

Qualifying individuals are persons who were admitted to the United States 

as refugees or were granted asylum, including persons who are lawful permanent 

residents or U.S. citizens who initially were admitted to the United States as 

refugees or were granted asylum. The 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 the individual entered the U.S. 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. 

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

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

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

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

member’s P-3 case if that individual:

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

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

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

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

3) demonstrates exceptional and compelling humanitarian circumstances 

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

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

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

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

refugee.

FY 2016 Priority 3 Nationalities

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

Afghanistan 

Bhutan

Burma
14

Burundi

Central African Republic

Colombia

Cuba

Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK)

Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC)

El Salvador

Eritrea

Ethiopia

Guatemala

Haiti

Honduras

Iran

Iraq

Mali

Somalia

South Sudan

Sri Lanka

Sudan

Syria

Uzbekistan

FOLLOWING-TO-JOIN FAMILY REUNIFICATION PETITIONS

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

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

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

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

may file a Form I-730 Refugee/Asylee Relative Petition5 with DHS/USCIS for 

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

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

National Visa Center then forwards the petition to the USCIS office, embassy or 

consulate nearest to the location of the beneficiary for travel eligibility. 

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

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

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

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

 

5

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

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

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

counted in the number of refugees admitted annually.
15

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

parents as the P-3 process does.

DHS/USCIS REFUGEE ADJUDICATIONS

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

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

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

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

to determine eligibility for refugee status has been delegated to USCIS. 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. Each quarter of the fiscal year, on average, USCIS 

deploys approximately 100 Refugee Officers, Supervisory Refugee Officers, and 

fingerprinters to 12-16 locations around the world to interview refugee applicants. 

DHS/USCIS also devotes substantial resources to security vetting, anti-fraud, and 

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

enforcement, national security, and intelligence communities to promote the 

integrity of the USRAP.

The Eligibility Determination

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

otherwise participated in persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, 
16

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 transactions, in the course of providing humanitarian 

assistance, or under sub-duress pressure), to undesignated terrorist organizations. 

As of June 2015, more than 15,560 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 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 certain refugee applicants. 

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 

 

6 Over 6,700 of these exemptions pertained to Burmese refugee applicants. Approximately 6,230 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.
17

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 refugees for admission to the 

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

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

DHS/USCIS adjudication. The RSCs assist applicants in completing 

documentary requirements and schedule DHS/USCIS refugee eligibility 

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

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

screening exams and attending cultural orientation programs. The RSC obtains 

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

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

United States.

In FY 2015, NGOs (Church World Service, Hebrew Immigrant Aid 

Society, and International Rescue Committee) worked under cooperative 

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

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

International organizations (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 U.S. 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.
18

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 ten languages: Arabic, Burmese, Chin, English, Farsi, Karen, 

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

available in nine other languages: Albanian, Amharic, Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian, 

French, Kirundi, Russian, Spanish, Tigrinya, and Vietnamese. Through this book, 

refugees have access to accurate information about the initial resettlement period 

before they arrive in the U.S. The Welcome to the United States refugee 

orientation video is available in ten languages: Arabic, Burmese, Chin, English, 

Farsi, Karen, Kinyarwanda, Nepali, Somali, and Swahili. The 2004 version of the 

video is available in five other languages: Karenni, Kirundi, Russian, Spanish, 

and Tigrinya. The Department of State also funded the development of an 

interactive online learning tool that combines cultural orientation with English 

language learning. Released in early FY2015, Choosing My Way is for refugees 

who would like to interact with orientation material independently or who may 

not actively engage in formal orientation. It is also designed for use by 

orientation providers to encourage group discussion and reflection. All of these 

materials are available to download free of charge at 

www.COResourceExchange.org. 

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

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

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

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

are made available to refugee applicants overseas. Groups featured include 

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

and Iraq. Faces of Resettlement, a video produced in 2013, shows five 

individuals who entered the United States as refugees, from Bhutan, Burma, 

Burundi, Iraq, and Sudan. Each of them tells their 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.

In FY2014, the Department of State released a new curriculum for cultural 

orientation after 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 
19

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 six months.

Reception and Placement (R&P)

In FY 2015, PRM funded cooperative agreements with nine private 

resettlement agencies to provide initial resettlement services to refugees arriving 

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

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

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

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

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

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

nine organizations maintain a nationwide network of 312 affiliated offices in 185 

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

of 24 affiliated offices through which unaccompanied refugee minors are placed 

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

Using R&P funds from PRM supplemented by 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; 
20

 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 U.S. by providing benefits and assistance to achieve selfsufficiency 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 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 

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

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

ORR regulations or the State TANF rates. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

nationwide. 
21

ORR also provides states/WF programs with Formula Refugee Social 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

home management, and if necessary to support employment, childcare and 

transportation. 

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

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

Older Refugees, Preventive Health, Refugee School Impact, and Targeted 

Assistance. 

ORR Matching Grant Program

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

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

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

households toward economic self-sufficiency through employment within four to 

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

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

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

assistance. For each MG participant, ORR awards $2,200 per capita to 

participating national resettlement agencies, which then allocate funds to its local 

service providers. Agencies provide a 50% match to every federal dollar. 

Through the ORR Matching Grant Program, local service providers ensure 

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

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

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

month eligibility period. In FY 2014, over 29,000 individuals were enrolled in 

the program, 76% of whom achieved self-sufficiency. Approximately 33% of 

refugees participate in the ORR Matching Grant Program.

ORR Refugee Health

ORR’s Division of Refugee Health (DRH) continued to address the health 

and well-being of refugees. DRH is working on various initiatives including: 
22

collaborating with states and partners in support of the expansion of Medicaid, 

administering the Survivors of Torture program; providing technical assistance on 

medical screening guidelines, mental health awareness and linkages, suicide 

prevention, emergency preparedness and other health and mental health initiatives 

(e.g. women’s health issues, mental health training, etc.). 

ORR Unaccompanied Refugee Minor (URM) Program

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

States contract with local licensed foster care agencies that provide specialized 

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

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

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

URMs receive various services including: English language training, educational 

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

permanency planning, independent living, 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 focus on special 

initiatives or programs for refugees including: case management, ethnic 

community development, home-based child care business development, 

individual development accounts, microenterprise development, and agricultural 

projects. 

In the past year, ORR has expanded its Preferred Communities Program to 

support long-term case management services to the more at risk populations as 

the program is seeing an increasing number of women heads of household and 

refugees with significant medical and mental health needs.

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, health, services to survivors of torture, and TANF state programs. 
23

REGIONAL PROGRAMS

TABLE II

PROPOSED FY 2016 REGIONAL CEILINGS BY PRIORITY

AFRICA

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 15,000

Priority 2 Groups 9,500

Priority 3 Family Reunification Refugees 500

Total Proposed: 25,000

EAST ASIA

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 1,800

Priority 2 Groups 11,000

Priority 3 Family Reunification Refugees 200

Total Proposed: 13,000

EUROPE / CENTRAL ASIA

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 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 2,000

Priority 3 Family Reunification Refugees 50

Total Proposed: 3,000

NEAR EAST / SOUTH ASIA

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 16,000

Priority 2 Groups 17,900

Priority 3 Family Reunification Refugees 

 100

Total Proposed: 34,000

UNALLOCATED RESERVE 6,000

TOTAL PROPOSED CEILING: 85,000
24

AFRICA

There are currently some 4.3 million refugees across the African continent, 

constituting roughly 25 percent of the global refugee population. Refugee 

numbers in Africa increased by nearly 1 million in 2014 and 2015 to date due to 

new or intensified conflicts across the continent. At the same time, there have 

been only limited opportunities in Africa for local integration and refugee 

repatriation. 

New and ongoing conflicts in four countries – Burundi, the Central 

African Republic (CAR), Nigeria, and South Sudan – are responsible for the rapid 

growth in refugee numbers in 2014 and 2015. In Burundi, 2015 election-related 

violence forced nearly 200,000 refugees to flee to neighboring Democratic 

Republic of Congo (DRC), Rwanda, and Tanzania; this outflow is expected to 

continue to grow throughout 2015. In CAR, the overthrow of the government and 

widespread clashes between armed groups, together with earlier conflict, has now 

displaced nearly 440,000 Central Africans internally and forced over 460,000 to 

flee to neighboring Cameroon, Chad, the DRC, and Republic of the Congo. 

Instability and violence in Nigeria, Cameroon, Chad and Niger have displaced 

more than 1.5 million in northern Nigeria and sent some 200,000 refugees to 

neighboring Cameroon, Chad, and Niger. Cameroon, Niger and Chad continue to 

struggle with rising numbers of internally displaced people as well. In South 

Sudan, conflict erupted in December 2013 between political factions and quickly 

escalated into a major conflict along ethnic lines. Over 1.5 million South 

Sudanese are internally displaced and total refugee numbers have now reached 

nearly 754,000. 

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

refugee outflows over the past few years. Intensified conflict in eastern DRC 

since mid-2012 has led an additional 180,000 Congolese to seek asylum in 

Uganda, Rwanda, and Burundi, bringing the total number of Congolese refugees 

to nearly 514,000. In Sudan, ongoing fighting between armed groups in Darfur 

has resulted in some 30,000 new Darfuri refugees fleeing to Chad, bringing the 

total number to nearly 370,000. At the same time, the ongoing Sudanese conflict 

with rebel groups in Southern Kordofan and Blue Nile states has forced some 

270,000 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. More than 300,000 Eritreans have fled political repression, 

forced conscription, and economic collapse over the past decade with some 

200,000 living as refugees in Africa. 
25

Africa’s refugee numbers have been augmented as well by conflicts outside 

of Africa, 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 160,000 new refugees to the region including 140,000 in Egypt 

and 18,000 in Libya. The new 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 

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 economically 

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

countries, such as 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 hospitality and first asylum for refugees. And, for those 

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

the establishment of systems in consultation with UNHCR. Morocco in 

particular has made progress in this regard.

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 current estimate is between 1,200-

3,000 individuals detained on religious grounds. At least three Jehovah's 
26

Witnesses had been detained for 15 years, reportedly for evading compulsory 

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

refusing to perform national service.

In Sudan, the government continues to place restrictions on 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, as was 

demonstrated in the recent case of Ms. Meriam Ishag who was sentenced to death 

for apostasy. Though the sentence was overturned and she was subsequently 

released, authorities express their strong prejudice against conversion by 

occasionally subjecting converts to intense scrutiny, ostracism, and intimidation, 

or by encouraging converts to leave the country.

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

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

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

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

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

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

United States 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

Despite new and protracted refugee situations, voluntary repatriation to 

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

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

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

progress in promoting and supporting refugee repatriation and reintegration in 

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

nearly one third (from more than six million at their height in the 1990s to 4.3 
27

million today) even in the face of new outflows. Large-scale organized 

repatriations to Angola, Liberia, and Rwanda have largely been completed, but 

residual populations remain. UNHCR recommended cessation of prima facie 

refugee status for refugees from Angola and Liberia effective June 30, 2012, and 

for pre-1999 caseload Rwandan refugees effective June 30, 2013. Efforts 

continue to repatriate those who still wish to return and to locally integrate 

residual populations where asylum countries agree to provide permanent 

residence or citizenship.

Smaller-scale repatriation efforts continue throughout the continent. In 

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

violence in Côte d’Ivoire, over 230,000 have now returned home. Repatriation 

was delayed in 2014 and early 2015 due to the Ebola crisis and subsequent border 

closures. However, UNHCR anticipates assisting with the return of the remaining 

60,000 Ivoirian refugees in 2015 and 2016. In Mali, while UNHCR is not yet 

promoting refugee return to northern Mali, more than 30,000 refugees returned 

spontaneously in 2014 to safe regions under government control. Returns have 

been slower in 2015 due to periodic outbreaks of violence in northern Mali.

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 over 622,000 new 

refugees. UNHCR, the Government of Kenya, and the Government of Somalia 

signed a Somali refugee repatriation framework in 2013, and UNHCR has 

supported the return of some 3,500 Somalis to date to pilot areas within Somalia. 

Most parts of Somalia, however, are not conducive to safe 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, most organized repatriation to Burundi ended in 2010 

and there were over 500,000 returns from 2002 to 2014. The 2015 electionrelated violence in Burundi, which has generated nearly 200,000 refugees to date, 

threatens to erase progress on Burundi repatriation. Although the majority of 

Rwandan refugees returned home in the late 1990’s, some 100,000 to 200,000 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 
28

of these gains. Eastern DRC is too insecure for large-scale refugee return at this 

point. UNHCR was able to conclude its repatriation program for some 130,000 

Congolese refugees to western DRC’s Equateur Province from 2012 through 

2014. 

Local Integration

While most African countries adhere to encampment policies for refugees, 

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

or permitting refugees to open small businesses. This integration dynamic has 

occurred particularly for refugees who fled during the 1960s through the early 

1980s to countries that had arable land available, allowing many refugees to move 

out of camps. Despite such de facto integration, refugees residing among the 

local population did not necessarily enjoy the rights, entitlements, or economic 

opportunities available to legal residents. As a result, this piecemeal integration 

was often an interim, rather than a durable, solution for many African refugees.

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

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

not or cannot repatriate. In West Africa, in conjunction with UNHCR, the 

Governments of Côte d’Ivoire, The Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Liberia, Nigeria, and 

Sierra Leone launched a regional local integration program for Liberian and 

Sierra Leonean refugees in 2007. That program provided refugees opportunities 

for economic self-reliance; activities to enhance the quality of their social 

integration; and legal rights and documentation, including access to citizenship in 

some countries and freedom of movement in all countries under the protocols of 

the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). 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. Mali 

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

paving the way for them to eventually apply for Malian citizenship.

In Southern Africa, local integration is being provided for up to 15,000 

former Angolan refugees. The Government of Zambia pledged in 2012 to offer 

permanent residence status to 10,000 former Angolan refugees -- mainly refugees 

who arrived before 1986, were born in Zambia, or are married to Zambians -- and 
29

has already approved 6,000 applicants who meet eligibility criteria. Namibia and 

South Africa have agreed to legal local integration of 2,400 and 2,500 former 

Angolan refugees respectively. 

In East Africa, the Government of Tanzania offered to provide permanent 

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

160,000 accepted the offer and are now in the process of receiving official 

documentation. While not offering a formal integration program, Uganda has 

permitted refugees to live or work outside of camps. 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 3,000 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 2015 U.S. Admissions

We project just over 21,000 African refugee arrivals in FY 2015. This 

number is primarily a result of increased processing capacity for Congolese 

refugees in the Great Lakes region. Two countries of origin – Somalia and DRC 

– account for the vast majority of U.S. refugee admissions from Africa, followed 

by Eritrea, Sudan and Ethiopia. 

Implementation of the enhanced Congolese Resettlement Strategy –

UNHCR’s effort to refer 50,000 DRC refugees for resettlement from Rwanda, 

Uganda, Tanzania and Burundi to all resettlement countries over the next 5-7 
30

years – continued in FY 2015 with increased processing in Tanzania and Burundi, 

following on efforts from Rwanda and Uganda. We anticipate strong arrivals of 

Congolese refugees from all four countries totaling approximately 7,000 arrivals.

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. Over 3,000 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 DHS interview and adjudication. Applicants return to Dadaab for medical 

exams and other post-DHS steps until their departure for the United States. 

Admissions from Ethiopia also continue to be strong with approximately 3,700 

U.S. arrivals projected this fiscal year. Populations include primarily Somalis 

from camps in the east and Eritreans from the northern camps, including 

approximately 70 Eritrean unaccompanied refugee minors. We also will resettle 

smaller numbers of Sudanese from camps in West. We continue to interview 

refugees from the Central African Republic in southern Chad and Sudanese 

Darfuri refugees in Eastern Chad. We expect to admit nearly 500 refugees from 

Chad in FY 2015, part of an effort to build a large resettlement operation for 

Darfuri refugees in Eastern Chad. An additional 250 refugees from various 

locations in West Africa are also expected to be admitted in FY 2015.

From Southern Africa, we expect to admit 2,400 refugees consisting 

primarily of Somalis from South Africa and Congolese from Namibia, Zambia, 

and Zimbabwe. Resettlement of these populations will allow UNHCR to 

decrease its “footprint” in these countries by closing or reducing the size of 

camps, so that resources can be utilized elsewhere. 

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 2015.

FY 2016 U.S. Resettlement Program

We propose up to 22,000 resettlement numbers for African refugees in FY 

2016. PRM has actively engaged relevant offices within the Department of State, 

UNHCR, the NGO community, and DHS/USCIS to identify caseloads 
31

appropriate for resettlement consideration. As a result of these discussions, PRM 

has identified a number of nationalities and groups for processing during FY 

2016.

From East Africa and the Great Lakes region, we expect close to 15,000 

admissions. We expect to resettle just over 3,000 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 camps in northern Ethiopia. In the Great Lakes region, processing of 

Congolese in Rwanda, Uganda, and Tanzania (and Burundi if the situation calms) 

is expected to result in a total of 8,000 departures. Approximately 3,500 of these 

admissions will be the result of a P-2 group designation for Congolese refugees in 

the sole remaining camp for Congolese in Tanzania. Departures from Uganda 

and Rwanda will likely hold steady with 2,000 and 1,800 departures respectively, 

but violence in Burundi will result in lower arrival numbers from Burundi in FY 

2016.

From southern Africa, we expect to admit 2,000 refugees consisting 

primarily of Somalis from South Africa and Congolese from Mozambique, 

Malawi, Namibia, Zambia, and Zimbabwe. 

In Chad, UNHCR intends to continue its effort to establish an infrastructure 

for a robust resettlement program for Sudanese Darfuris in eastern Chad. This 

will be in addition to the continued processing of Central African Republic 

refugees from southern Chad. Total admission numbers from West Africa and 

Chad are expected to be approximately 400.

Outside of sub-Saharan Africa, we anticipate 2,500 to 3,500 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 2016 Africa program to include arrivals from the following 

categories: 

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 15,000

Priority 2 Groups 9,500

Priority 3 Family Reunification 500

Total Proposed Ceiling 25,000
32

EAST ASIA 

Several countries in East Asia host large and diverse refugee populations. 

Recent years have seen important developments for these groups. Thailand and 

Bangladesh continue to host large numbers of Burmese refugees and asylumseekers, and thousands of urban asylum seekers and refugees 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 12,000, including some 4,300 refugees, in recent years. 

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 77,000 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 reregistered by UNHCR in 2005 and formally registered by the Royal Thai 

Government (RTG). P-2 processing will continue until we have completed the 

processing of every application received by the deadline in each camp. Those 

who do not exercise this option will be able to remain in the camps until safe and 

voluntary returns are possible. The United States will continue to accept 

individual referrals from UNHCR for all nationalities, including 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 9,000 projected 

refugee departures in FY15 and more than 53,000 since 2006. As of the end of 

March 2015, there were 152,574 persons of concern registered with UNHCR in 

Malaysia of which 141,568, or 92.8 percent, are from Burma. In addition, some 

11,000 asylum-seekers and refugees from various countries – primarily 
33

Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, 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 and continuous 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 Songkhla, Thailand and began cracking 

down on migrant smuggling operations. Because of this crackdown and 

significantly higher volumes of Rohingya seeking passage to Malaysia through 

smuggling networks, smugglers have taken to holding their ships at sea as they 

await conditions for disembarkation or sometimes abandon them. By May 10 

over 4,100 people landed in Indonesia, Malaysia, Bangladesh, Burma, and 

Thailand. On May 20, the Foreign Ministers of Malaysia and Indonesia and 

Thailand agreed to continue to provide humanitarian assistance and temporary 

shelter to some 7,000 migrants and asked the international community to take 

responsibility for the repatriation of the migrants or resettlement to third countries 

within a period of one year. The Administration is actively involved in 

supporting the 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. 

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. 

Since then, steady flows of Rohingya continue to arrive, with a spike following 

the June and October 2012 violence in Rakhine State when hundreds of thousands 

of Rohingya fled to neighboring countries. 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 currently 

supports 32,600 refugees who remain 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. These makeshift sites include 42,000 unregistered Rohingya in 

the makeshift Kutupalong site (adjacent to the official Kutupalong refugee camp), 

15,000 at the Leda site, and 9,000 at the Shamlapur site. 

The cases of more than 500 Rohingya in Bangladesh, including 300 

individuals approved for resettlement have been on hold since October 2010 

when the GOB halted third-country resettlement activities pending a review of its
34

refugee policy. In February 2014, the GOB announced its national strategy on 

“Myanmar Refugees and Undocumented Myanmar Nationals in Bangladesh.” 

The U.S. government is encouraged by GOB commitments made in the national 

strategy, particularly to survey and list undocumented Rohingya and to allow 

third country resettlement to continue. We are prepared to resume resettlement 

activity immediately upon notification by the GOB that we may proceed. In 

addition, we expect ongoing UNHCR referrals of urban Burmese in India. 

As reflected in the North Korean Human Rights Act, the United States 

remains deeply concerned about the human rights situation of North Koreans both 

inside the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) and in various 

countries in the region. The United States began resettling interested, eligible 

North Korean refugees and their family members in 2006 and remains committed 

to continuing this program.

Religious Freedom

Although many governments in East Asia do not restrict religious freedom, 

religious believers face serious persecution in several countries. The DPRK, 

China, and Burma are designated by the Department of State as Countries of 

Particular Concern (CPCs) under the International Religious Freedom Act of 

1998 for systematic, ongoing, and egregious violations of religious freedom. 

The DPRK severely restricts religious freedom, including organized 

religious activity, except that which is supervised tightly by officially recognized 

groups linked to the government. Although the DPRK constitution provides for 

“freedom of religious belief,” genuine religious freedom does not exist. 

Information about the day-to-day life of religious persons in the country is 

limited. Religious and human rights groups outside of the country have provided 

numerous reports that members of underground churches have been beaten, 

arrested, tortured, or killed because of their religious beliefs.

While the constitutions of China, Burma, and Vietnam provide for freedom 

of religion, in practice, these governments restrict or repress religious activities of 

some members of religious communities in a manner that is inconsistent with 

their commitments to uphold freedom of religion. 

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 
35

additionally reprimanded members of government-sanctioned churches for 

advocacy on behalf of their church communities. Certain religious or spiritual 

groups are banned by law. The criminal law defines banned groups as “evil 

cults” and those belonging to them can be sentenced to prison. This includes 

Falun Gong and some other qigong-based groups, in addition to some Christian 

groups. Although legislation officially abolished the Reeducation through Labor 

(RTL) system in December 2013, religious believers have been harassed, 

arrested, detained in “black jails” without due process and sentenced to long jail 

terms. There have been credible allegations of torture.

In Burma, the government implemented considerable political and 

economic reforms, resulting in improved respect for many human rights. While 

some deficiencies in respect for and protection of the right to religious freedom 

continued, the government continued to support interfaith dialogue and provided 

some members of the international community and international organizations 

greater access to ethnic minority areas. However, the government continues to 

discriminate against members of religious minorities. 

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 antidiscrimination laws. Incidents of violence against Rohingya 

started to increase in 2012 and carried over into 2014. Racially- and religiouslybased discrimination and violence, especially against members of the Rohingya 

population, continue. 

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. Over the past three years, Vietnam’s religious freedom 

record has been mixed. Progress has been made with regard to the 

registration/recognition of religious groups and congregations. In addition, 

religious groups have experienced expanded freedom of assembly. However, 

there are also reports of harassment at the local level, including through the use of 

land laws. Several Protestant congregations in rural areas continue to report 

harassment, including beatings and forced renunciations. 

Nationals of the DPRK, Vietnam, China, Laos, and Burma have access to 

the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program. North Korean and Burmese refugees also 

have access to family reunification processing through Priority 3.
36

Voluntary Repatriation

Although the Burmese government has taken steps to implement 

significant democratic and political reforms, ongoing fighting continues in 

Kachin and northern Shan States, and tensions remain high in Rakhine State since 

the June and October 2012 violence. Since 2011, Burmese President Thein 

Sein’s reform-minded administration has been working towards a national 

reconciliation and peace process. We are hopeful that substantial progress 

towards this goal will be made in the near future, but the Department of State also 

recognizes the political realities in Burma given the upcoming election in 

November 2015. Further, the post-ceasefire peace process will require resolution 

of unresolved political grievances. Therefore, the voluntary repatriation of most 

Burmese refugees and asylum seekers in Thailand, Bangladesh, Malaysia, India 

and elsewhere is not a viable solution in the immediate future. 

Local Integration 

Due to fears of a “pull factor,” countries in the region have traditionally 

been reluctant to integrate refugees or to grant asylum. We hope that U.S. efforts 

to resettle large numbers of refugees from the camps along the Thailand-Burma 

border will encourage the Thai government to allow greater opportunities for 

livelihood, vocational training and other skills-building activities for those 

refugees who will not be resettled. The United States and other donor 

governments continue to engage regularly with the Thai government concerning 

the future of the nine camps on the Thailand-Burma border. Local integration 

remains a difficult option, due to opposition from host countries, such as 

Thailand, Bangladesh, Malaysia, and India. UNHCR and the international 

community continue to advocate for these governments to make policy changes 

relating to refugees, and to expand humanitarian protection and assistance space 

for refugees, asylum seekers, and other persons of concern.

Third-Country Resettlement 

The United States continues to lead third country resettlement efforts in the 

region. Other countries, including Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the 

Nordic countries, resettle refugees referred by UNHCR. In FY 2015, the United 

States processed UNHCR-referred refugee cases in China, the Hong Kong 

Special Administrative Region, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand. 

 
37

FY 2015 U.S. Admissions 

We expect to admit over 17,000 refugees from East Asia in FY 2015. This 

will include nearly 6,000 members of Burmese ethnic minorities (mostly Karen, 

Karenni, and Kachin) living in camps along the Thai-Burma border, over 11,000 

Burmese (of various ethnic minorities) in Malaysia, and a small number of urban 

refugees of various nationalities in the region. 

FY 2016 U.S. Resettlement Program 

We expect to admit up to 13,000 refugees from East Asia in FY 2016. This 

will include up to 5,500 members of Burmese ethnic minorities (mostly Karen 

and Karenni) living in camps along the Thai-Burma border, some 6,000 Burmese 

(of various ethnic minorities) in Malaysia, and a small number of urban refugees 

of various nationalities in the region 

Proposed FY 2016 East Asia program to include arrivals from the following 

categories: 

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 1,800

Priority 2 Groups 11,000 

Priority 3 Family Reunification 200

Total Proposed Ceiling 12,000
38

EUROPE AND CENTRAL ASIA

Europe continues to host large refugee populations, as well as other persons 

affected by conflict, who, over the last two decades, have been left in situations of 

protracted displacement – some in dire conditions. In its 2014-15 Global Appeal, 

UNHCR reported on its priority of providing protection to millions of asylum 

seekers, refugees, internally displaced persons (IDPs), stateless individuals, or 

other persons of concern throughout Europe and Central Asia. Many had fled 

conflicts outside the region, such as in Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan, but hundreds 

of thousands of refugees and IDPs in the Balkans and Caucasus remain from 

yesterday’s wars.

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, 

compliance with these instruments remains problematic. UNHCR and other 

stakeholders continue to build 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 also created newly independent 

states with sizeable populations of stateless individuals due to gaps in nationality 

laws and inconsistent implementation of those laws. Difficulty in establishing 

citizenship at the time of succession has also created later problems for children 

born to an undocumented parent(s). The problem of statelessness remains in the 

region, although some states, such as Turkmenistan, have taken steps to register

stateless individuals and facilitate their acquisition of nationality. 

According to UNHCR, as of December 2014, there were approximately 

365,710 refugees and IDPs in the Balkans, almost all of whom have been 

displaced for a decade or longer. An estimated 206,026 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. There have been over 25,000 voluntary returns of minorities to Kosovo 

since the conflict ended, but housing, documentation issues, a lack of 

employment opportunity, and occasional violence directed against ethnic Serbs in 

Kosovo has limited continuing return prospects. 
39

Since 2010, the countries of the region – with the assistance of the international 

community – made significant progress toward resolving a large part of the 

refugee situation in the Balkans. A November 2011 ministerial meeting in 

Belgrade brought together Ministers of Foreign Affairs from Serbia, Croatia, 

Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Montenegro to sign a Joint Declaration expressing 

their collective will to resolve the protracted refugee and displacement situation, 

and they committed their countries to a Regional Housing Program (RHP) for 

refugees and IDPs supported by international donors. The RHP was designed to 

create durable solutions for up to 74,000 of the most vulnerable refugees and 

IDPs in those countries. While principally affecting housing, the RHP has 

established the Regional Coordination Forum to discuss other pertinent issues 

such as 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) to support 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 FY15 and FY16 

to be the years where we see construction commence in earnest. 

Despite important steps taken by governments 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 NagornoKarabakh 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 or aid its displaced population. Armenia received 350,000 

refugees from Azerbaijan, of whom almost 3,000 remain as refugees. A large 

number emigrated to other countries, and nearly 90,000 were ultimately 

naturalized 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 16,000 Syrian-Armenians has left the government few resources to 

address refugee concerns, and the country remains dependent on international 

humanitarian and development assistance. Georgia 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 
40

district (in the Abkhazia region), secured a durable housing solution elsewhere in 

Georgia, or remained in their original places of residence near the South Ossetia 

region, approximately 240,000 remain displaced from the 1993 and 2008 wars. 

Finally, in Ukraine, fighting between government troops and combined 

Russian-Separatist forces continues despite the signing of ceasefire agreements in 

September 2014 and February 2015. Russia’s occupation of Crimea, which is 

part of Ukraine, and the fighting in parts of eastern Ukraine have resulted in 

nearly two million people having been displaced from their homes, including over 

1.2 million registered IDPs and over 777,000 refugees and asylum seekers in 

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 

host communities reach absorption capacity. Integration opportunities for 

refugees are increasingly 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 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. 
41

There is a disturbing increase in anti-Semitism and anti-Muslim sentiment 

in a number of countries in the region, manifested as physical assaults and verbal 

harassment; hate speech over the internet; and vandalism of cemeteries, 

synagogues, mosques, and monuments. In several countries, openly anti-Semitic, 

nationalistic political parties have gained seats in parliaments, with government 

officials and elected members of parliaments at times responsible for anti-Semitic 

statements and acts. 

Bans on Kosher/Halal slaughter exist in several European countries, while 

there are increasing calls for bans or restrictions on circumcision, particularly in 

the Nordic countries. Both circumcision and Kosher/Halal slaughter are religious 

practices for Jews and Muslims, as well as some other religious groups. 

The Russian government uses its anti-extremism law to justify raids, 

arrests, and bans on religious literature of peaceful, “non-traditional” minority 

religious groups, including readers of Muslim theologian Said Nursi, Jehovah’s 

Witnesses, Scientologists, Falun Gong practitioners, and some Protestant groups.

 

In Turkey, some religious minority communities, including Alevis, face 

difficulties owning property, registering places of worship, training clergy, and 

training clergy. Conscientious objectors through their faith in Armenia, 

Azerbaijan, Belarus, Turkey, and Turkmenistan are sometimes arrested and 

prosecuted for failing to comply with laws mandating military service.

Voluntary Repatriation

The international community continues to support efforts to create 

favorable conditions for the return of ethnic minorities to their homes in the 

Balkans. In June 2006, Serbian, Kosovo, and UN authorities signed the Protocol 

on Voluntary and Sustainable Return to Kosovo, which sought to improve the 

conditions for return by focusing on three elements: ensuring the safety of 

returnees, returning property to the displaced and rebuilding their houses, and 

creating an overall environment that sustains returns. There is still much work to 

be done in ensuring that those hoping to return have all the means to do so. PRM 

supported the return process through a grant to Danish Refugee Council in FY15 

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 
42

returns to take place in Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and 

Montenegro. The program will encourage both voluntary repatriation and local 

integration as durable solutions. 

Local Integration

UNHCR has led efforts to create viable asylum systems and effective legal 

protections for refugees in the Balkans, the Russian Federation, the South 

Caucasus and Central Asia. However, ineffective implementation of these laws, 

combined with the history of national animosities and xenophobia throughout the 

region, often makes effective local integration difficult for ethnic minority 

refugees. In Azerbaijan, a majority of refugees lack legal status, despite being 

recognized by UNHCR and permitted by the government to stay in the country. 

As such, refugees do not have access to legal employment, making local 

integration in Azerbaijan extremely difficult. In Russia, difficulties in acquiring 

citizenship remain for some former Soviet citizens who resided in Russia before 

1992 and are, under Russian law, entitled to Russian citizenship. 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 to contribute 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, more than 

half of whom are members of religious minorities from Russia and Eurasia 

processed under the Lautenberg Amendment. While Jews comprised an average 

of 85% of the applicant pool in the early nineties, Evangelical Christians now 

make up over 90% of the applicant pool. Jewish immigration to Israel from the 

region continues under the United Israel Appeal Program. 

In addition to Lautenberg cases, the United States also accepts UNHCRreferred cases of Somalis, Afghans, Iraqis, and various African and former Soviet 

Union nationalities through Malta, Emergency Transit Centers (ETCs) in 

Timisoara, Romania and Humenne, Slovakia, and other locations in Europe and 
43

Central Asia. In an effort to continue processing refugees trapped in countries 

with deteriorating security situations, the United States transfers a limited number 

of urgent cases from high-conflict locations, where refugee interviews can no 

longer take place, to the ETCs for processing. Although limited by the number of 

slots available (200 in Timisoara and 150 in Humenne) and the many logistical 

challenges of multiple transfers, 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.) 

FY 2015 U.S. Admissions

In FY 2015 the United States plans to resettle an estimated 2,300 refugees 

from Europe and Central Asia, the majority of which are Lautenberg 

cases. Applicants are being processed in Baku, Bishkek, Chisinau, Dushanbe, 

Kyiv, Valletta, Minsk, Tbilisi, Moscow, Timisoara, and Humenne.

FY 2016 U.S. Resettlement Program

The proposed FY 2016 ceiling for refugees from Europe and Central Asia 

is 4,000 individuals. Priority 2 includes individuals who will be processed under 

Lautenberg guidelines in the states of the former Soviet Union. Approval rates 

have gone up significantly since FY14 and remain steady. In addition, 

applications for the Lautenberg program have increased substantially since the 

outbreak of conflict in Ukraine.

Proposed FY 2016 Europe and Central Asia program to include arrivals from 

the following categories: 

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 990

Priority 2 Groups 3,000 

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 approached 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 million IDPs as of February 2015. Despite an expanded state 
44

presence and improved security in cities and towns throughout Colombia, 

displacement continues. In 2014 the GOC registered 150,317 newly displaced 

individuals as a result of confrontations between the GOC and illegal armed 

groups, including the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), the 

National Liberation Army (ELN), criminal gangs (BACRIM) and criminal narcotrafficking networks. According to UNHCR, it is likely that displacement will 

continue. 

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 

2013, the Government of Ecuador (GOE) has recognized 54,865 refugees and 

UNHCR reports an additional 80,243 persons of concern. The asylum process in 

Ecuador is slow and difficult to access; and 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 up to a year 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, many of the 1,808 recognized refugees and over 15,000 persons 

of concern are Colombians (as of June 2014). 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 

December 2014, in Costa Rica, there are 12,858 recognized refugees and 9,582 of 

persons of concern to UNHCR. The recognition rate for asylum applications is 

approximately 7.5%. Decisions in asylum cases in Costa Rica can take up to a 

year yet asylum seekers have the right to work while they are waiting for a 

decision. UNHCR reported in December 2014 that there are 4,340 recognized 

refugees in Venezuela, and UNHCR estimates there are more than 200,000 

persons live in a refugee-like situation in the country. As of mid-2014 in Brazil, 

there are almost 6,000 recognized refugees from 75 countries; the largest numbers 

are from Colombia and the Democratic Republic of Congo.
45

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, including the desire to reunify with 

family members residing in the United States, contributed to an unprecedented 

number of unaccompanied children and families with young children arriving in 

the United States in 2014. In FY 2014 51,700 unaccompanied children and 

61,300 individuals in family units from El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala 

were apprehended by United States Border Patrol. This was a sharp increase 

compared with 4,400 unaccompanied children from these same countries 

apprehended in FY 2010. In the first half of FY 2015 authorities apprehended 

11,200 family units and 9,800 unaccompanied children from these same 

countries. 

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 U.S. Refugee Admissions Program in Havana offers Cubans 

who have been persecuted on a number of grounds, including their religious 

beliefs, the opportunity for permanent resettlement in the United States. 

Manifestations of anti-Semitism that occurred throughout the hemisphere at 

times appeared correlated to the unfolding transitions to democracy in other parts 

of the world. In Venezuela, anti-Semitism is a growing concern, including 

instances of anti-Semitism in the government-controlled media. 

Voluntary Repatriation

Given the threats and violence in Colombia from illegal armed groups 

(non-state actors) and the lack of state presence to provide full protection in some 

areas, UNHCR has not been actively promoting repatriation of Colombian 

refugees.
46

Local Integration 

The Governments of Costa Rica, Ecuador, Panama, and Venezuela have 

maintained policies that theoretically allow Colombians in need of protection to 

obtain asylum and integrate locally, although the processes involved are usually 

slow and cumbersome. The governments' capacity to review applications and 

confer refugee status remains limited. Even registered refugees with the right to 

work in these countries struggle to find stable employment or income 

opportunities, competing with the large number of poor in host communities. 

Colombians seeking international protection face high levels of discrimination 

and xenophobia, and the ability to locally integrate 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 the agency’s 

continued presence in Haiti have contributed greatly to its ability to address the 

protection needs of refugees, asylum-seekers, and displaced and stateless persons 

in mixed migration flows throughout the region. Despite Dominican Republic 

restarting its refugee eligibility committee (CONARE) in 2012, the asylum 

process remains dysfunctional. Only 3% of cases were approved in 2013 and 

none were approved in 2014. We also remain concerned that individuals at risk 

of statelessness due to the September 203 Constitutional Tribunal ruling may be 

expelled upon resumption of deportations on June 15. 

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 
47

UNHCR to resettle a modest number of Colombian refugees. The Department of 

State is providing technical support to bolster Uruguay’s resettlement program. 

The United States also facilitates the resettlement to third countries of persons 

interdicted by the U.S. Coast Guard 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.

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. New applications reflect a 

shrinking pool of qualified applicants. Some approved refugees do not have 

sufficient funds to pay for the medical exams and passports needed to depart 

Cuba, delaying their departure. As previously noted, the exit permit requirement 

was abolished on January 14, 2013. The Refugee Section has not received any 

recent information regarding individuals who have been prevented by the Cuban 

government from traveling.

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 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 U.S. must complete the DS-7699 with the assistance of a 

State Department-funded resettlement agency. Applicants found by DHS to be at 
48

a risk or harm but not eligible for refugee resettlement will be 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. 

FY 2015 U.S. Admissions

We anticipate admitting approximately 2,300 refugees from Latin America 

and the Caribbean during FY 2015. Cubans compose the overwhelming majority 

of refugees resettled from the region. Historically, most Cuban admissions were 

former political prisoners and forced labor conscripts. The program was 

expanded in 1991 to include human rights activists, displaced professionals, and 

others with claims of persecution, which currently compose the majority of 

admissions. We expect about 600 Colombian refugees to be admitted to the 

United States during FY 2015.

FY 2016 U.S. Resettlement Program

The proposed 3,000 ceiling for Latin America and the Caribbean for FY 

2016 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; as well as a small number of Priority 3 family 

reunification cases. 

Proposed FY 2016 Latin America program to include arrivals from the 

following categories: 

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 950

Priority 2 Groups 2,000

Priority 3 Family Reunification 50

Total Proposed Ceiling 4,000
49

NEAR EAST AND SOUTH ASIA

The Near East/South Asia region remains host to more than twelve million 

refugees, primarily Afghans, Bhutanese, Iranians, Iraqis, Palestinians, Sri 

Lankans, Tibetans, and Syrians. Few countries in the region are party to the 1951 

Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and/or its 1967 Protocol. 

Nonetheless, many host governments tolerate the presence of refugees within 

their borders.

UNHCR, ICRC, IOM, WFP, UNRWA, and other humanitarian 

organizations work with refugees in the region. Some countries have provided 

long-term protection and/or asylum, mainly to Tibetans, Bhutanese, Sri Lankans, 

Palestinians, Afghans, 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. In 2014, UNHCR also began to refer several thousand 

vulnerable Syrian refugees residing in Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, and Egypt 

to a number of resettlement countries. 

As of February 20, 2015, more than 189,000 Iraqi refugees were registered 

with UNHCR in the region. There is no internationally agreed-upon number of 

Iraqi refugees and IDPs due to the fact that not all are registered with UNHCR 

and they are dispersed throughout the region. Prior to the current conflict, 

UNHCR reported that approximately 950,000 Iraqis remained internally 

displaced by sectarian violence following the Samarra Mosque bombing of 

February 2006. IOM reports that over three million Iraqis have been displaced 

since January 2014 by violence in Iraq. As of February 2015, there are nearly 

250,000 Syrian refugees in Iraq, as well as approximately 36,000 refugees and 

6,500 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 across the region through support to international 

and non-governmental organizations. U.S. funding seeks to ensure conflictaffected Iraqis receive shelter, water, sanitation, health care, protection, and 

education. Since the start of Fiscal Year 2014, the U.S. has provided nearly $478

million in essential humanitarian assistance.

Intense fighting in Syria has caused massive displacement, both internally 

and to countries in the region. Inside Syria, more than 12.2 million Syrians 

require humanitarian assistance, 7.6 million are internally displaced and 5.6 

million children are in need. Nearly five million Syrians are living in areas that 

are difficult to reach. Some 440,000 people, and perhaps many more, remain 
50

besieged predominantly by the regime and the terrorist group Islamic State of Iraq 

and the Levant. The regime has long besieged nearly 170,000 civilians in the 

Damascus suburbs, consistently barring aid agencies from reaching them, 

including in the Yarmouk neighborhood, which has been besieged for two years. 

Outside of Syria, neighboring countries are hosting nearly four 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 has pushed the number of Lebanese living in poverty to 

170,000, rising by nearly two-thirds since 2011. Meanwhile, Turkey has spent 

over $6 billion to support refugees, through construction and services in high 

quality camps and other support to non-camp 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. As of July 6, 2015 the U.S. 

government, the single largest global donor, had provided over $4 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 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 host countries.

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 96,000 of the 
51

original population of 108,000 Bhutanese refugees in Nepal have departed after 

spending two decades in camps in eastern Nepal; of which more than 81,000 have 

resettled in the U.S. 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 allow the remaining refugees 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 Middle 

East and South Asia that are countries of origin for refugee populations entering 

the United States. State and local government responses to violence against 

members of religious groups, particularly Muslims and Christians, are often 

inadequate. Although many of these countries do not have Jewish populations, 

anti-Semitism is prevalent, and often espoused by governments or religious 

leaders.

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.
52

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 targeted many of its attacks 

and abuses on the basis of religious identity, declaring an intention to exterminate 

or displace Shia Muslims for example and prompting mass displacement of 

religious minorities, including but not limited to Yezidis, Christians, Shabaks, and 

Kaka’is. Ongoing sectarian tensions and discrimination impact all of Iraq’s 

religious and ethnic communities. Some 20 percent of registered Iraqi refugees 

are members of religious minorities, a figure appreciably larger than their 

percentage of the overall Iraqi population. As a result, some of these religious 

communities, along with their ancient languages and customs, are on the verge of 

disappearing.

In Syria, the 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, and others as the current civil war continues. Largescale internal and external displacement of all sectors of the population is 

ongoing.

In Egypt, the government generally failed to prevent, investigate, or 

prosecute crimes against members of religious minority groups, which fostered a 

culture of impunity. Christians, Shias, Bahais, and atheists faced personal and 

collective discrimination, especially in government employment and the ability to 

build, renovate, and repair places of worship. The government failed to protect 

Christians targeted by kidnappings and extortion, and there were reports that 

security and police officials sometimes failed to respond to these crimes, 
53

especially in Upper Egypt. The government used “reconciliation sessions” 

following sectarian attacks against Christians rather than prosecuting the 

perpetrators of the crimes.

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 Muslim citizens. Iran and Saudi 

Arabia are designated by the Department of State as CPCs under the International 

Religious Freedom Act of 1998 for systematic, ongoing, and egregious violations 

of religious freedom. 

The USRAP provides resettlement access in various ways to refugees who 

suffer religious persecution. Under the Specter Amendment, Iranian religious 

minorities designated as Priority 2 category members are considered under a 

reduced evidentiary standard for establishing a well-founded fear of persecution. 

Iranian refugees have also gained access to the program through Priority 3. In 

addition, the USRAP accepts UNHCR and embassy referrals of religious 

minorities of various nationalities in the region. Nationals of any country, 

including CPCs, may be referred to the U.S. program by UNHCR or a U.S. 

embassy for reasons of religious persecution.

Voluntary Repatriation

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. The era of 

mass returns has largely ended, however, with about 12,991 returning in 2014. 

The substantial repatriation represents roughly 20 percent of Afghanistan’s total 

population and has taxed the country’s capacity to absorb them, let alone 

additional refugee returns.

It is unlikely that all of the remaining 2.5 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 

policies and programs to sustain voluntary returns. They are also working to 

better manage the residual Afghan population in Pakistan by working toward 
54

longer-term protection and migration solutions. IOM is seeking a greater role in 

border management and in developing regional mechanisms for economic 

migration that would bolster protection for Afghans. The Government of the 

Islamic Republic of Afghanistan is working to increase its capacity in helping 

returnees fold back into Afghan economic and social structures and at the same 

time prioritizes continued protection for Afghan citizens still seeking refuge 

abroad. UNHCR, together with the Governments of Afghanistan, Iran, and 

Pakistan, continue to work toward implementing the Solutions Strategy for 

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 plans to begin 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, approximately 6,000 refugees have 

returned. However, the number of Tamils seeking to return from India has 

decreased. So far in 2015, UNHCR assisted in the voluntary return of 147 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 
55

program is widely regarded as a success in addressing Afghan refugee and 

Pakistani host community needs by rehabilitating areas that have been adversely 

affected by the presence of Afghan refugee communities over the past 30 years. 

The United States will continue to work with UNHCR and the Government of 

Pakistan to preserve asylum space and promote alternative stay arrangements. 

However, at present, local integration is not an option for most of the Afghan 

refugees.

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 24,000 UNHCRregistered Iraqi refugees as of February 20, 2015. Iraqis do not need a visa to 

enter Syria. Jordan and Lebanon host approximate 45,000 and 14,500 Iraqi 

refuges respectively. Both countries closely manage their borders, requiring 

Iraqis to obtain visas before entering, which effectively limiting 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. The 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 donor support, 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 some do so in the grey economy. Although 

the Government of Jordan allows Iraqis to work legally in several labor sectors, 

few have obtained work permits because these required 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. 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. The Government of Iraq, the Kurdish 

Regional Government, and the UN are working together to ensure the safe and 

voluntary return of IDPs to liberated areas. 

While Turkey ratified the 1951 UN Refugee Convention and acceded to its 

1967 Protocol, the Turkish government acceded to the Protocol with a geographic 

limitation acknowledging refugees only from Europe. While most asylum 

seekers are thus not considered refugees under Turkish law, the Turkish 

government grants temporary refuge and temporary local integration possibilities 
56

to refugees recognized by UNHCR usually pending their referral to a potential 

resettlement country. As of March 31, 2015, there were over 200,000 refugees, 

as well as those pre-registered and registered with UNHCR Turkey, the majority 

from Iraq (65%), Afghanistan (18%) and Iran (8%). In addition to the Syrian 

influx into Turkey over the past year, Turkey has also seen substantial, increased 

arrivals of Iraqis due to the increased violence in neighboring Iraq. UNHCRrecognized refugees and asylum seekers in Turkey are assigned to one of 64 

satellite cities. Provincial governments are responsible for meeting their basic 

needs, including by providing access to employment, healthcare, and education 

although support varies from one location to another.

On April 4, 2013, the Turkish Parliament passed the “Foreigners and 

International Protection Law,” which will regulate the entry, exit, and the stay of 

migrants in the country, along with the scope of international protection for those 

who seek asylum in Turkey. The law went into full implementation on April 11, 

2014. The law created a new entity, the Directorate General for Migration 

Management (DGMM), within the Ministry of Interior. 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. 

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 every 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. 

UNHCR has negotiated an agreement with the Government of India 

whereby India would facilitate access to citizenship for Hindu and Sikh Afghan 

refugees who meet the standard criteria to acquire Indian citizenship. 

Naturalization clinics were established to support the citizenship process for 
57

Hindu and Sikh Afghans, and UNHCR intensified its efforts to ensure that all 

eligible refugees had submitted applications for Indian citizenship by December 

31, 2009. As a result, over 4,400 applications were submitted and over 680 

Afghans have naturalized. 

Third-Country Resettlement

The USRAP anticipates the continued large-scale processing of Iraqis, and, 

to a lesser extent, Bhutanese and Iranians, and will continue to increase the 

number of Syrians processed during FY 2016. RSC pre-screening and USCIS 

adjudications in Baghdad were suspended in June 2014 due to the relocation of 

personnel outside Iraq, however, as of April 17, 2015, both of these operations 

have resumed. As of June 1, a large backlog of more than 58,000 U.S.-affiliated 

Iraqis remains. As the situation permits, USCIS team sizes will be increased to 

accommodate additional interviews. During the period when interviews were not 

conducted, out-processing was expedited for those cases that had already had 

their USCIS interview. Those applicants continue to depart as security and 

medical checks are cleared. 

 

In late 2013, UNHCR announced its intention to refer 30,000 Syrian 

refugees for resettlement in third countries by the end of 2014 and up to 100,000 

additional Syrian refugees by 2016. The United States will play a significant role 

in this effort. The majority of Syrian referrals will be processed in Turkey, 

Jordan, and Egypt, and to a lesser extent in Lebanon and elsewhere. UNHCR has 

referred over 13,000 Syrians for U.S. resettlement consideration. As of May 30, 

2015, the U.S. has admitted 701 Syrian refugees in FY 2015 and expects to admit 

1,000-2,000 Syrians by the end of the fiscal year. In FY 2016, admissions are 

expected to be somewhat higher, though still in the low thousands.

According to UNHCR, Turkey is the largest refugee-hosting country in the 

world with nearly two million Syrians and 200,000 Iraqis. It is UNHCR’s largest 

refugee resettlement operation in the world. In FY14, USRAP resettled over 

5,600 refugees from Turkey, mainly Iraqis, Iranians, and Afghans. With 

UNHCR’s decision in 2014 to start referring Syrians for resettlement, the United 

States is ramping up our program in Turkey, and has agreed to accept 14,000 

refugees of various nationalities into the 2015 resettlement pipeline. 

The United States recognizes that the possibility of third-country 

resettlement must be available to the most vulnerable Iraqi and Syrian refugees, 

and has processing facilities in Amman, Baghdad, Beirut, Cairo, Damascus, and 

Istanbul, although interviews are not currently taking place in Beirut or 

Damascus. While many Iraqis gain access to the USRAP via a referral from 
58

UNHCR, we are also facilitating direct access to the USRAP for Iraqis with close 

U.S. affiliations in a limited number of countries in the region. The Refugee 

Crisis in Iraq Act, enacted January 28, 2008, created categories of Iraqis who are 

eligible for direct access (P-2) to the USRAP, both inside and outside Iraq. 

Currently, beneficiaries of P-2 categories who may seek access to the USRAP in 

Jordan, Egypt, Iraq, and the UAE include: 

1. Iraqis who work/worked on a full-time basis as interpreters/translators 

for the U.S. Government, MNF-I in Iraq, or U.S. Forces-Iraq; 

2. Iraqis who are/were employed by the U.S. Government in Iraq; 

3. Iraqis who are/were employees of an organization or entity closely 

associated with the U.S. mission in Iraq that has received U.S. 

Government funding through an official and documented contract, 

award, grant or cooperative agreement;

4. Iraqis who are/were employed in Iraq by a U.S.-based media 

organization or non-governmental organization; 

5. Spouses, sons, daughters, parents, and siblings of individuals described 

in the four categories above, or of an individual eligible for a Special 

Immigrant Visa as a result of his/her employment by or on behalf of the 

U.S. Government in Iraq, including if the individual is no longer alive, 

provided that the relationship is verified; and

6. Iraqis who are the spouses, sons, daughters, parents, brothers, or sisters 

of a citizen of the United States, or who are the spouses or unmarried 

sons or daughters of a Permanent Resident Alien of the United States, as 

established by their being or becoming beneficiaries of approved 

family-based I-130 Immigrant Visa Petitions.

Refugee processing in Iraq is 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 a RSC in Iraq limit in-country 

processing capacity, both the RSC and USCIS have resumed interviews in small 

numbers.

Middle Eastern and South Asian refugees in most of Europe avail 

themselves of the asylum systems of the countries in which they are located. In 

Vienna, however, certain Iranian religious minorities (Baha’is, Zoroastrians, 

Jews, Mandaeans, and Christians) may be processed for U.S. resettlement using 

special procedures authorized by the Government of Austria. The Lautenberg 

Amendment was reauthorized December 2014, allowing new applications to be 

filed and adjudicated under Lautenberg guidelines. The United States also 
59

processes Iranian religious minorities (primarily Baha’i) and other Iranians in 

Turkey through special procedures involving fast-track refugee status 

determination and referral by UNHCR.

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 2015, UNHCR had referred over 110,000 Bhutanese 

refugees for resettlement to eight countries and some 95,000 of these Bhutanese 

refugees have been resettled to these countries – more than 81,000 resettled in the 

United States – since late 2007. Processing of Bhutanese refugees who have 

declared interest in resettlement will take several more years.

The United States works with other countries- mainly Australia, Canada 

and New Zealand – to preserve protection space and to coordinate the 

resettlement of Afghans from Pakistan. UNHCR has almost doubled its referral 

capacity since 2012 with a 2015 target of referring 2,200 refugees for third 

country resettlement; approximately half will be referred to the U.S. 

In India, UNHCR currently refers some 400 individuals per year, with 

priority given to those they deem most vulnerable. The majority of referrals are 

Burmese. UNHCR also refers a very limited number of refugees out of Sri 

Lanka, mostly Pakistanis. We continue to explore modalities for processing 

vulnerable Tibetan refugees in the region.

FY 2015 U.S. Admissions

We estimate the admission of approximately 27,700 refugees from the 

region in FY 2015. These will include some 6,000 Bhutanese, 15,000 Iraqis, 

3,000 Iranians, 1,500 Syrians, and several hundred Afghans, including women 

who had been living in Iran processed through the UNHCR Emergency Transit 

Center in Slovakia. 

FY 2016 U.S. Resettlement Program

The proposed regional ceiling for refugees from the Near East and South 

Asia for FY 2016 is 34,000, including vulnerable Iraqis, Bhutanese, Iranians, 

Syrians, Pakistanis, and Afghans. We expect individual UNHCR referrals of 

various religious and ethnic groups in the region, including Assyrians, Mandeans, 

Iranian Kurds, and Syrian Kurds. In addition, Ahmadi Muslims in many 

locations and Afghans in the former Soviet Union, Pakistan, India, and elsewhere 

will be included. 
60

Proposed FY 2016 Near East/ South Asia program to include arrivals from the 

following categories: 

Priority 1 Individual Referrals 16,000

Priority 2 Groups 17,900

Priority 3 Family Reunification 100

Total Proposed Ceiling 34,000
61

DOMESTIC IMPACT OF REFUGEE ADMISSIONS

In FY 2014, the USRAP admitted 69,987 refugees from 57 countries. 

More than half were originally from either Iraq or Burma. (See Table III.)

The demographic characteristics of refugee arrivals from the 20 largest 

source countries (representing close to 100 percent of total arrivals) in FY 2014 

illustrate the variation among refugee groups. The median age of all FY 2014 

arrivals was 26 years and ranged from 19 years for arrivals from the Republic of 

South Sudan to 37 years of age for arrivals from Iran. In FY 2014, 47.46 percent 

of all arriving refugees were female and 52.54 percent of all arriving refugees 

were male. Males predominated among refugees from Sudan (69.5 percent), 

Burundi (60.2 percent), and Eritrea (57 percent). (See Table IV.)

Of the total arrivals in FY 2014, some 9.6 percent were under the age of 

five, 25.6 percent were of school age, 64.9 percent were of working age, and 3.6 

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 20.9 percent among Syria arrivals to a low of 

2.6 percent of those from Iran. The number of school-aged children (from five to 

17 years of age) varied from a high of over 40.7 percent of arrivals from the 

Democratic Republic of Congo to a low of 10.8 percent of those from Iran. The 

number of working-aged refugees (16 to 64 years of age) varied from a high of 

78.4 percent of those from Vietnam to a low of 50.4 percent of individuals from 

Syria. Retirement-aged refugees (65 years or older) ranged from a high of 11.8 

percent of arrivals from Iran to a low of less than one percent of those from 

Burundi, the Republic of South Sudan, and Sri Lanka. 

During FY 2014, 62 percent of all arriving refugees resettled in 12 states. 

The majority were placed in Texas (10.3 percent), followed by California (8.7 

percent), New York (5.8 percent), Michigan (5.7 percent), Florida (5 percent), 

and Arizona (4.2 percent). The states of Ohio (4 percent), Pennsylvania (3.9 

percent), Georgia (3.8 percent), Illinois (3.6 percent), Washington (3.5 percent), 

and North Carolina (3.4 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 2014

Country of Origin

Arrival 

Number

% of 

Total

Afghanistan 753 1.08%

Algeria 2 0.00%

Bangladesh 2 0.00%

Bhutan 8,434 12.05%

Burma 14,598 20.86%

Burundi 68 0.10%

Cambodia 44 0.06%

Cameroon 5 0.01%

Central African Republic 25 0.04%

Chad 21 0.03%

China 53 0.08%

Colombia 252 0.36%

Congo 30 0.04%

Cuba 4,062 5.80%

Dem. Rep. Congo 4,540 6.49%

Egypt 21 0.03%

Eritrea 1,488 2.13%

Ethiopia 728 1.04%

Former Soviet Union* 958 1.37%

Gabon 1 0.00%

Gambia 1 0.00%

Guinea 9 0.01%

Haiti 4 0.01%

India 7 0.01%

Indonesia 1 0.00%

Iran 2,846 4.07%
63

Iraq 19,769 28.25%

Ivory Coast 42 0.06%

Jordan 7 0.01%

Kenya 21 0.03%

Korea, North 8 0.01%

Kuwait 12 0.02%

Lebanon 1 0.00%

Liberia 31 0.04%

Mali 2 0.00%

Mauritania 4 0.01%

Nepal 47 0.07%

Nigeria 4 0.01%

Pakistan 240 0.34%

Palestine 141 0.20%

Philippines 1 0.00%

Republic of South Sudan 57 0.08%

Rwanda 45 0.06%

Saudi Arabia 1 0.00%

Sierra Leone 6 0.01%

Somalia 9,000 12.86%

Sri Lanka (Ceylon) 57 0.08%

Sudan 1,315 1.88%

Syria 105 0.15%

Tanzania 1 0.00%

Togo 26 0.04%

Tunisia 2 0.00%

Uganda 5 0.01%

United Kingdom 1 0.00%

Vietnam 79 0.11%

Yemen 3 0.00%
64

Zimbabwe 1 0.00%

TOTAL 69,987 100.00%

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 2014

Rank

(# of 

Arrivals) Country of Origin

Refugees

Admitted

Median

Age

%

Females

%

Males

1 Iraq 19,769 28 46.73% 53.27%

2 Burma 14,598 23 45.99% 54.01%

3 Somalia 9,000 21 47.31% 52.69%

4 Bhutan 8,434 29 50.08% 49.92%

5 Dem. Rep. Congo 4,540 20 51.50% 48.50%

6 Cuba 4,062 36 49.38% 50.62%

7 Iran 2,846 37 49.19% 50.81%

8 Eritrea 1,488 22 42.94% 57.06%

9 Sudan 1,315 25 30.49% 69.51%

10 Former Soviet Union* 958 30 53.24% 46.76%

11 Afghanistan 753 23 54.58% 45.42%

12 Ethiopia 728 23 48.35% 51.65%

13 Colombia 252 25 52.38% 47.62%

14 Pakistan 240 24 43.33% 56.67%

15 Palestine 141 28 43.26% 56.74%

16 Syria 105 23 51.43% 48.57%

17 Vietnam 79 29 46.84% 53.16%

18 Burundi 68 22 39.71% 60.29%

19 Rep. of South Sudan 57 19 56.14% 43.86%

20 Sri Lanka (Ceylon) 57 26 49.12% 50.88%

21 All Other Countries 497 25 49.90% 50.10%

TOTAL 69,987 26 47.46% 52.54%

Source: Department of State, Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration, Refugee Processing Center
66

TABLE V

Select Age Categories of Refugee Arrivals, Fiscal Year 2014

Rank

(# of 

Arrivals) Country of Origin

Under 

5 Yrs

School 

Age 

(5-17)

Working 

Age

(16-64)

Retirement 

Age

(=or > 65)

1 Iraq 9.38% 23.62% 65.74% 4.42%

2 Burma 12.60% 24.14% 64.82% 1.49%

3 Somalia 11.66% 34.82% 57.33% 1.03%

4 Bhutan 8.05% 20.68% 68.95% 6.26%

5 Dem. Rep. Congo 9.85% 40.77% 54.38% 0.93%

6 Cuba 4.33% 19.52% 71.98% 8.22%

7 Iran 2.67% 10.82% 76.46% 11.84%

8 Eritrea 8.67% 32.33% 64.65% 0.27%

9 Sudan 9.43% 21.06% 71.86% 0.15%

10 Former Soviet Union* 8.87% 25.37% 61.48% 8.66%

11 Afghanistan 6.24% 35.33% 65.47% 1.33%

12 Ethiopia 10.85% 30.63% 62.36% 0.69%

13 Colombia 5.95% 36.11% 61.51% 1.19%

14 Pakistan 8.75% 30.00% 62.92% 1.25%

15 Palestine 7.80% 22.70% 69.50% 3.55%

16 Syria 20.95% 26.67% 50.48% 3.81%

17 Vietnam 5.06% 17.72% 78.48% 1.27%

18 Burundi 8.82% 29.41% 66.18% 0.00%

19 Rep. of South Sudan 15.79% 33.33% 57.89% 0.00%

20 Sri Lanka (Ceylon) 7.02% 19.30% 73.68% 0.00%

21 All Other Countries 7.85% 26.96% 69.22% 0.80%

TOTAL 9.60% 25.63% 64.91% 3.64%

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 2014

STATE

Refugee 

Arrivals

Amerasian 

Arrivals

Total

Arrivals

% of 

Total Arrivals 

to U.S.

Alabama 107 0 107 0.15%

Alaska 141 0 141 0.20%

Arizona 2,964 0 2,964 4.24%

Arkansas 7 0 7 0.01%

California 6,108 0 6,108 8.73%

Colorado 1,813 0 1,813 2.59%

Connecticut 543 0 543 0.78%

District of Columbia 29 0 29 0.04%

Florida 3,519 0 3,519 5.03%

Georgia 2,694 0 2,694 3.85%

Hawaii 2 0 2 0.00%

Idaho 978 0 978 1.40%

Illinois 2,578 0 2,578 3.68%

Indiana 1,614 0 1,614 2.31%

Iowa 692 0 692 0.99%

Kansas 490 0 490 0.70%

Kentucky 1,849 0 1,849 2.64%

Louisiana 211 0 211 0.30%

Maine 388 0 388 0.55%

Maryland 1,227 0 1,227 1.75%

Massachusetts 1,937 4 1,941 2.77%

Michigan 4,006 0 4,006 5.72%

Minnesota 2,232 0 2,232 3.19%

Mississippi 7 0 7 0.01%

Missouri 1,392 0 1,392 1.99%

Nebraska 1,076 0 1,076 1.54%

Nevada 569 0 569 0.81%

New Hampshire 345 0 345 0.49%

New Jersey 363 0 363 0.52%

New Mexico 163 0 163 0.23%
68

STATE

Refugee 

Arrivals

Amerasian 

Arrivals

Total

Arrivals 

% of 

Total Arrivals 

to U.S.

New York 4,082 0 4,082 5.83%

North Carolina 2,443 0 2,443 3.49%

North Dakota 582 0 582 0.83%

Ohio 2,815 0 2,815 4.02%

Oklahoma 389 0 389 0.56%

Oregon 1,019 0 1,019 1.46%

Pennsylvania 2,739 0 2,739 3.91%

Puerto Rico 2 0 2 0.00%

Rhode Island 188 0 188 0.27%

South Carolina 121 0 121 0.17%

South Dakota 523 0 523 0.75%

Tennessee 1,467 0 1,467 2.10%

Texas 7,209 5 7,214 10.31%

Utah 1,085 0 1,085 1.55%

Vermont 317 0 317 0.45%

Virginia 1,310 0 1,310 1.87%

Washington 2,483 0 2,483 3.55%

West Virginia 28 0 28 0.04%

Wisconsin 1,129 3 1,132 1.63%

Total 69,975 12 69,987 100.00%

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 2015 AND FY 2016 ($ MILLIONS)

AGENCY

ESTIMATED

FY 2015

(BY DEPARTMENT)

ESTIMATED 

FY 2016

(BY DEPARTMENT)

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

United States Citizenship and Immigration Services

 Refugee Processing 1

 $32.3 $36.5

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration

 Refugee Admissions 2, 3

$507.1 $ 503.7

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Administration for Children and Families,

Office of Refugee Resettlement

 Refugee Resettlement 4

 $609.1 $652.6

TOTAL $1,148.5 $1,192.8

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. Additional funding in FY 2016 is pending 

leadership approval and availability of fee account resources.

2

FY 2015: Includes FY 2015 MRA appropriation of $394.2 million, $42.2 million in PRM 

carryover from FY 2014, $55.7 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 2016.

3 FY 2016: Includes FY 2016 MRA budget request of $442.7 million, $55 million in projected 

IOM loan collections/carryover, and an estimate of $6 million in prior year MRA recoveries. 

Funds carried forward from FY 2015 will also be available in FY 2016. 

4

FY 2015 and FY 2016: 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 Alien Children’s Program, Temporary Assistance for Needy 

Families (TANF), Medicaid, Supplemental Security Income programs, or the Victims of 

Domestic Trafficking. The estimated FY 2016 figures above reflect the President’s FY 2016 

Budget request. 
70

TABLE VIII 

UNHCR Resettlement Statistics by Resettlement Country CY 2014 Admissions

RESETTLEMENT 

COUNTRY TOTAL

PERCENT OF TOTAL

RESETTLED

United States 48,911 67.0%

Canada 7,233 9.9%

Australia 6,162 8.4%

Germany 3,467 4.7%

Sweden 1,497 2.1%

Norway 1,188 1.6%

Finland 1,011 1.4%

Netherlands 743 1.0%

New Zealand 632 .87%

United Kingdom 628 .86%

France 378 .52%

Denmark 332 .45%

Austria 269 .37%

Switzerland 139 .19%

Ireland 98 .13%

Uruguay 52 .07%

Brazil 44 .06%

Romania 44 .06%

Belgium 32 .04%

Spain 30 .04%

Luxembourg 28 .04%

Japan 23 .03%

Argentina 21 .03%

Portugal 14 .02%

Rep. of Korea 14 .02%
71

Liechtenstein 5 .01%

Czech. Rep. 4 .01%

Hungary 4 .01%

Iceland 4 .01%

Mexico 1 .00%

TOTAL 73,008 100.00%

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.