H-1B Visa Program: More Oversight by Labor Can Improve Compliance with Program Requirements
Published: 2006-06-22T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: The H-1B visa program assists U.S. employers in temporarily filling certain occupations with highly-skilled foreign workers. There is considerable interest regarding how Labor, along with Homeland Security and Justice, is enforcing the requirements of the program. This testimony summarizes our report, GAO-06-720 , that describes how Labor carries out its H-1B program responsibilities and how Labor works with other agencies involved in the H-1B program.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: While Labor's H-1B authority is limited in scope, it does not use its full authority to oversee employers' compliance with program requirements. Labor's review of employers' applications to hire H-1B workers is timely, but lacks quality assurance controls and may overlook some inaccuracies. From January 2002 through September 2005, Labor electronically reviewed more than 960,000 applications and certified almost all of them. Labor's review of the applications is limited by law to checking for missing information or obvious inaccuracies and does this through automated data checks. However, in our analysis of Labor's data, we found more than 3,000 applications that were certified even though the wage rate on the application was lower than the prevailing wage for that occupation. We also found approximately 1,000 certified applications that contained erroneous employer identification numbers, which raises questions about the validity of the applications. In its enforcement efforts, Labor's Wage and Hour Division (WHD) investigates complaints made against H-1B employers. From fiscal year 2000 through fiscal year 2005, Labor reported an increase in the number of H-1B complaints and violations, and a corresponding increase in the number of employer penalties. In fiscal year 2000, Labor required employers to pay back wages totaling $1.2 million to 226 H-1B workers; by fiscal year 2005, back wage penalties had increased to $5.2 million for 604 workers. Program changes, such as a higher visa cap in some years, could have been a contributing factor. In April 2006, WHD began randomly investigating willful violators of the program's requirements. Labor uses education as its primary method of promoting compliance with the H-1B program by conducting compliance assistance programs and posting guidance on its web site. Labor, Homeland Security, and Justice all have responsibilities under the H-1B program, but Labor and Homeland Security face challenges sharing information. After Labor certifies an application, USCIS reviews it but cannot easily verify whether employers submitted petitions for more workers than originally requested on the application because USCIS's database cannot match each petition to Labor's application case number. Also, during the process of reviewing petitions, staff may find evidence that employers are not meeting their H-1B obligations. For example, Homeland Security may find that a worker's income on the W-2 is less than the wage quoted on the original application. USCIS may deny the petition if an employer is unable to explain the discrepancy, but it does not have a formal process for reporting the discrepancy to Labor. Moreover, current law precludes WHD from using this information to initiate an investigation of the employer. Labor also shares enforcement responsibilities with Justice, which pursues charges filed by U.S. workers who allege they were displaced by an H-1B worker. From 2000 through 2005, Justice found discriminatory conduct in 6 out of the 97 investigations closed, and assessed a total of $7,200 in penalties.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: I am pleased to be here today to assist you in your oversight of the H-1B  nonimmigrant visa program. This program was established to assist U.S.  employers in temporarily filling certain positions with highly-skilled  foreign workers. Employers who want to hire H-1B workers must attest to  meeting certain labor conditions—such as notifying all employees of the  intention to hire H-1B workers and offering H-1B nonimmigrants the same  benefits as U.S. workers. A small number of H-1B employers are required  to make additional attestations concerning the non-displacement and  recruitment of U.S. workers. In recent years, employers have requested  more of these workers than are allowed to come into the country—the cap  on H-1B visas has been reached before or shortly after the beginning of  each fiscal year. Currently, the annual number of H-1B workers authorized  to enter the United States is 65,000, but in previous years the cap has been  as high as 195,000.
Several agencies are involved in the H-1B visa program. The Departments  of Labor (Labor), Homeland Security (Homeland Security), and Justice  (Justice) each have specific responsibilities during certain stages of the   H-1B visa process, ranging from reviewing and approving an employer’s  request to hire an H-1B worker, to investigating complaints from both U.S.  and foreign workers. The Department of State also has a role in issuing the  worker’s visa. Recently, there has been considerable interest regarding  how Labor, in conjunction with the other agencies, is ensuring that  employers comply with the requirements of the H-1B program.
I will draw on the results of a report we are releasing today that was  conducted at the request of Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler,  Ranking Member Jackson Lee, and Representative Smith, which describes  (1) how Labor carries out its H-1B program responsibilities and (2) how  Labor works with other agencies involved in the H-1B program. To  address these questions, we interviewed officials from Labor, Homeland  Security’s U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), and Justice.  We also reviewed laws and regulations pertaining to the H-1B program. We  analyzed data on the applications electronically reviewed by Labor as well  as data on the H-1B complaints received by Labor and the outcomes of the  associated investigations. We also analyzed data on the H-1B petitions  received by USCIS and conducted site visits to the California and Vermont  service centers. Finally, we analyzed reports from Justice regarding the  outcomes of its investigations into charges of U.S. worker displacement by  H-1B workers. A detailed discussion of our methodology is available in our  full report.
In summary, Labor’s oversight of the H-1B program is limited even within  the scope of its existing authority. Labor’s review of employers’   H-1B applications is limited by law to identifying omissions and obvious  inaccuracies, but we found it does not consistently identify all obvious  inaccuracies. For example, Labor certified more than 3,000 applications  even though the wage on the application was lower than the wage the  employers were required to pay for that occupation and location. Labor’s  Wage and Hour Division (WHD) enforces H-1B program requirements by  investigating complaints made against H-1B employers and recently began  random investigations of previous program violators. From fiscal year  2000 through fiscal year 2005, complaints and violations increased but  changes in the program, such as temporary increases in visa caps, may  have been a factor. Labor shares H-1B responsibilities with Homeland  Security and Justice, but Labor and Homeland Security face challenges  sharing information across agencies. Homeland Security cannot easily  verify whether employers submitted petitions for more workers than they  originally requested on their application to Labor because USCIS’s data  system does not match each petition to Labor’s application case number.  Additionally, during the process of reviewing petitions, USCIS staff told us  they may find evidence that employers are not meeting their H-1B  obligations. However, USCIS does not have a formal mechanism to report  such information to Labor, and current law precludes WHD from using  this information to initiate an investigation of an employer. Justice pursues  charges filed by U.S. workers alleging they were not hired or were  displaced so that an H-1B worker could be hired instead, but it has not  found discriminatory conduct in most cases.
To increase employer compliance with the H-1B program and protect the  rights of U.S. and H-1B workers, Congress should consider eliminating the  restriction on Labor using petition information submitted by employers to  Homeland Security as the basis for initiating an investigation. Congress  should also consider directing Homeland Security to provide Labor with  information received during the adjudication process that may indicate an  employer is not fulfilling its H-1B responsibilities. To strengthen oversight  of employers’ applications to hire H-1B workers and to help ensure  employers are complying with program requirements, we recommend that  Labor improve its procedures for checking for completeness and obvious  inaccuracies, and, as Homeland Security’s USCIS transforms its  information technology system, it include Labor’s application case number  in the new system.
The agencies gave us technical comments on our report and Homeland  Security agreed with our recommendations. Labor questioned whether  more stringent checks were necessary and believes Congress intentionally  limited Labor’s role and placed program integrity with USCIS.
We believe there are cost-effective methods Labor could use to check the  applications more stringently that would enhance the integrity of the H-1B  process.
subsections: section_title: Background
paragraphs: The H-1B program was created by the Immigration Act of 1990, which  amended the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). The H-1B visa  category was created to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary workers  as needed in specialty occupations, or those that require theoretical and  practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge. It also  requires a bachelor’s or higher degree (or its equivalent) in the specific  occupation as a minimum requirement for entry into the occupation in the  United States. The Immigration Act of 1990 capped the number of H-1B  visas at 65,000 per fiscal year.
Since the creation of the H-1B program, the number of H-1B visas  permitted each fiscal year has changed several times. Congress passed the  American Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act of 1998  (ACWIA), which increased the limit to 115,000 for fiscal years 1999 and  2000. In 2000, Congress passed the American Competitiveness in the  Twenty-First Century Act (AC-21), which raised the limit to 195,000 for  fiscal year 2001 and maintained that level through fiscal years 2002 and  2003. The number of H-1B visas reverted back to 65,000 thereafter.
Generally, an H-1B visa is valid for 3 years of employment and is  renewable for an additional 3 years.
Filing an application with Labor’s Employment and Training  Administration is the employer’s first step in hiring an H-1B worker, and  Labor is responsible for either certifying or denying the employer’s  application within 7 days. By law, it may only review applications for  omissions and obvious inaccuracies. Labor has no authority to verify the  authenticity of the information. Employers must include on the application  information such as their name, address, rate of pay and work location for  the H-1B worker, and employer identification number. All employers are  also required to make four attestations on the application as to:  1.  Wages:  The employer will pay non-immigrants at least the local  prevailing wage or the employer’s actual wage, whichever is  higher, and pay for nonproductive time caused by a decision made  by the employer; and offer nonimmigrants benefits on the same  basis as U.S. workers.  2.  Working conditions:  The employment of H-1B nonimmigrants will  not adversely affect the working conditions of U.S. workers  similarly employed.   3.  Strike, lockout, or work stoppage:  No strike or lockout exists in  the occupational classification at the place of employment.   4.  Notification:  The employer has notified employees at the place of  employment of the intent to employ H-1B workers.
Certain employers are required to make three additional attestations on  their application. These additional attestations apply to H-1B employers  who: (1) are H-1B dependent, that is, generally those whose workforce is  comprised of 15 percent or more H-1B nonimmigrant employees; or (2) are  found by Labor to have committed either a willful failure to meet H-1B  program requirements or misrepresented a material fact in an application  during the previous 5 years. These employers are required to additionally  attest that: (1) they did not displace a U.S. worker within the period of   90 days before and 90 days after filing a petition for an H-1B worker;   (2) they took good faith steps prior to filing the H-1B application to recruit  U.S. workers and that they offered the job to a U.S. applicant who was  equally or better qualified than an H-1B worker; and (3) prior to placing  the H-1B worker with another employer, they inquired and have no  knowledge as to that employer’s action or intent to displace a U.S. worker  within the 90 days before and 90 days after the placement of the H-1B  worker with that employer.
After Labor certifies an application, the employer must submit a petition  for each worker it wishes to hire to USCIS. On March 1, 2003, Homeland  Security took over all functions and authorities of Justice’s Immigration  and Naturalization Service under the Homeland Security Act of 2002 and  the Homeland Security Reorganization Plan of November 25, 2002.  Employers submit to USCIS the application, petition, and supporting  documentation along with the appropriate fees. Information on the  petition must indicate the wages that will be paid to the H-1B worker, the  location of the position, and the worker’s qualifications. Through a  process known as adjudication, USCIS reviews the documents for certain  criteria, such as whether the petition is accompanied by a certified  application from Labor, whether the employer is eligible to apply for H-1B  workers, and whether the prospective H-1B worker is qualified for the  position.
The Wage and Hour Division of Labor’s Employment Standards  Administration performs investigative and enforcement functions to  determine whether an employer has complied with its attestations on the  application. An aggrieved individual or entity or certain non-aggrieved  parties may file a complaint with Labor that an employer violated a  requirement of the H-1B program. To conduct an investigation, the  Administrator must have reasonable cause to believe that an employer did  not comply with or misrepresented information on its application.
Employers who violate any of the attestations on the application are  subject to civil money penalties or administrative remedy, such as paying  back wages to H-1B workers or debarment, which disqualifies an employer  from participating in the H-1B program for a specified period of time.  Employers, the person who filed the complaint, or other interested parties  who disagree with the findings of the investigation then have 15 days to  appeal by requesting an administrative hearing.
The Office of Special Counsel for Immigration Related Unfair Employment  Practices (OSC) of the Department of Justice also has some enforcement  responsibility. Under statutory authority created by the Immigration  Reform and Control Act of 1986, OSC pursues charges of citizenship  discrimination brought by U.S. workers who allege that an employer  preferred to hire an H-1B worker.
section_title: Labor Does Not Use Its Full Authority to Oversee Employers’ Compliance with Program Requirements
paragraphs: Labor’s H-1B authority is limited in scope, but it does not use its full  authority to oversee employers’ compliance with program requirements.  Labor’s review of employers’ applications to hire H-1B workers overlooks  some inaccuracies, such as applications containing invalid employer  identification numbers. WHD investigates complaints made against H-1B  employers and recently began random investigations of some employers  who had previously violated program requirements. Labor uses education  as the primary method of promoting employers’ compliance with the H-1B  program.
subsections: section_title: Labor’s Review of Employers’ Requests Is Fast but May Overlook Some Inaccuracies
paragraphs: Labor reviews applications electronically by subjecting them to data  checks, and its web site informs employers that it will certify or deny  applications within minutes based on the information entered. We found  that of the 960,563 applications that Labor electronically reviewed from  January 2002 through September 2005, it certified 99.5 percent.
Labor’s review of the application is limited by law to identifying omissions  or obvious inaccuracies. Labor defines an obvious inaccuracy as when an  employer:  files an application after being debarred, or disqualified, from  participating in the H-1B program;    submits an application more than 6 months before the beginning  date of the period of employment;  identifies multiple occupations on a single application;    states a wage rate that is below the Fair Labor Standards Act  minimum wage;  identifies a wage rate that is below the prevailing wage on the  application; and  identifies a wage range where the bottom of the range is lower than  the prevailing wage on the application.
Despite these checks, Labor’s system does not consistently identify all  obvious inaccuracies. For example, although the overall percentage was  small, we found 3,229 applications that were certified even though the  wage rate on the application was lower than the prevailing wage for that  occupation in the specific location (see table 1).
Additionally, Labor does not identify other errors that may be obvious.  Specifically, Labor told us its system reviews an application’s employer  identification number to ensure it has the correct number of digits and  that the number does not appear on the list of employers who are  ineligible to participate in the H-1B program. However, we found 993  certified applications with invalid employer identification number  prefixes. Officials told us that in other programs, such as the permanent  employment program, Labor matches the application’s employer  identification number to a database with valid employer identification  numbers. However, they do not formally do this match with H-1B  applications because it is an attestation process, not a verification process.
Likewise, Labor officials told us they frequently review the application  process to determine where improvements can be made, but they rely on a  system of data checks rather than a formal quality assurance process  because of the factual nature of the form and the number of applications  received. Also, officials said if they conducted a more in-depth review of  the applications, they could overreach their legal authority and increase  the processing time for applications. Additionally, they said the integrity of  the H-1B program is ensured through enforcement and by the fact that  there is actual review by staff when the employer submits the paperwork  to USCIS.
section_title: Labor Investigates Complaints, and Has Begun the Process of Randomly Investigating Previous Violators
paragraphs: Labor enforces H-1B program requirements primarily by investigating  complaints filed against employers by H-1B workers or others. Labor’s  Wage and Hour Division received 1,026 complaints from fiscal year 2000  through fiscal year 2005. Labor officials said they investigate the  employer’s compliance with all program requirements for all H-1B  workers; therefore, an investigation may yield more than one violation.
While the number of H-1B complaints and violations has increased from  fiscal year 2000 through fiscal year 2005, the overall numbers remain small  and may have been affected by changes to the program. As shown in table  2, we found that the number of complaints increased from 117 in fiscal  year 2000 to 173 in fiscal year 2005, and the number of cases with  violations more than doubled, along with a corresponding increase in the  number of employer penalties. In fiscal year 2000, Labor required  employers to pay back wages totaling $1.2 million to 206 H-1B workers; by  fiscal year 2005, back wages penalties had increased to $5.2 million for 604  workers. The most common type of violation each fiscal year involved a  failure to pay H-1B workers the required wage. Labor officials told us it is  difficult to attribute changes in complaints and violations to any specific  cause because of multiple legislative changes to the program, such as the  temporary increase in the number of H-1B workers allowed to enter the  country and the additional attestations for certain employers that expired  and then were reinstated.
Labor’s Wage and Hour Division has recently begun random investigations  of employers who have willfully violated H-1B program requirements in  the past. Under the INA, as amended, Labor has had the authority to  conduct these investigations since 1998, but officials told us the agency  had not done so until recently for several reasons. First, these employers  frequently go out of business because they are not allowed to participate  in the H-1B program for a period of time. Second, there are only a limited  number of willful violators—just 50 nationwide in late fiscal year 2005. In  addition, we were told that H-1B investigators have heavy caseloads.  However, Labor officials said they now have 59 cases that they can  investigate, and in April 2006, directed each of their regional offices to  initiate a random investigation of at least one employer prior to the end of  fiscal year 2006.
section_title: Labor Relies Primarily on Education to Promote Employer Compliance
paragraphs: Labor uses education as the primary method of promoting employer  compliance with the H-1B program. From 2000 through 2005, Labor’s  district offices conducted six presentations on H-1B compliance. Labor  also holds compliance seminars in response to requests from employer  associations and discusses program requirements with companies that do  not have pending lawsuits related to the H-1B program. Additionally,  Labor posts guidance and fact sheets on its web site. While some of its fact  sheets have not been updated since the program was amended by the H-1B  Visa Reform Act in 2004, officials said 26 new fact sheets will be posted on  the agency’s web site by the end of fiscal year 2006. During investigations  of employers, Labor explains the employer’s legal obligations and asks the  employer about the changes it plans to make to comply with the law.  When an investigation results in an employer’s debarment, Labor  publicizes the case through press releases highlighting the consequences  for not complying with H-1B program requirements. Labor is also working  with the Department of State to provide information cards to H-1B  workers when they are issued their visa. These cards inform them about  their employment rights, including required wages and benefits, illegal  deductions, working conditions, records, and discrimination.
Homeland Security and Justice also use education to promote employer  compliance with the H-1B program. Homeland Security publishes  informational bulletins and uses its web site to advise the public of any  changes to the program regarding filing fees or eligibility resulting from  changes in the law. Justice engages in educational activities through public  service announcements aimed at employers, workers, and the general  public. The agency trains employers and works with other federal agencies  to coordinate employer education programs. Justice also uses a telephone  intervention hotline to resolve disputes between U.S. workers and H-1B  employers, answers questions submitted via e-mail, issues guidance, and  provides information on its web site.
section_title: Labor and Homeland Security Face Challenges Sharing Information
paragraphs: Labor, Homeland Security, and Justice all have responsibilities under the  H-1B program, but Labor and Homeland Security face challenges sharing  information that could help identify possible program violations. In  addition to Homeland Security, Labor also shares enforcement  responsibilities with Justice, which pursues charges filed by U.S. workers  who allege that they were not hired or were displaced because of an H-1B  worker. Justice has found discriminatory conduct in relatively few cases.
subsections: section_title: Labor and Homeland Security Coordinate to Process Employers’ Requests to Hire H-1B Workers, but Do Not Use Certain Information to Investigate Possible Violations
paragraphs: Homeland Security reviews Labor’s certified application as part of the  adjudication process; however, it cannot easily verify whether employers  have submitted petitions for more workers than originally requested on  the application. USCIS’s data system does not match each petition to its  corresponding application because the system does not include a field for  the unique number Labor assigns each application. As a result, USCIS  cannot easily verify how many times the employer has used a given  application or which petitions were supported by which application,  potentially allowing employers to use the application for more workers  than they were certified to hire. USCIS told us that while it has attempted  to add Labor’s application case number to its database, it has not been  able to because of the system’s memory limitations and it will be several  years before a new information technology system is operational.
During the process of reviewing employers’ petitions, USCIS may find  evidence the employer is not meeting the requirements of the   H-1B program, but current law precludes Labor’s Wage and Hour Division  from using this information to initiate an investigation of the employer.  Some petitions to extend workers’ H-1B status have been submitted with  W-2 forms where the wage on the W-2 was less than the wage the  employer indicated it would pay on the original Labor application,  according to USCIS staff. If the employer is unable to adequately explain  the discrepancy, USCIS may deny the petition but does not have a formal  mechanism for reporting these discrepancies to Labor. Moreover, even if  USCIS did report these cases, current law precludes WHD from using the  information to initiate an investigation. According to officials from Labor,  it does not consider Homeland Security to be an aggrieved party;  therefore, Labor would not initiate an investigation based on information  received from, or a complaint filed by, Homeland Security.
section_title: Justice Handles U.S. Worker Cases
paragraphs: Justice pursues charges filed by U.S. workers who allege that an H-1B  worker was hired in their place. Such charges may be resolved before an  administrative law judge, through an out-of-court settlement, or by  dismissal for lack of reasonable cause to believe that a violation occurred.  From 2000 through 2005, no cases were heard by an administrative law  judge. Most of the 101 investigations started by Justice from 2000 through  2005 were found to be incomplete, withdrawn, untimely, dismissed, or  investigated without finding reasonable cause for a violation. Of the   97 investigations closed, Justice found discriminatory conduct in 6 cases,  and assessed $7,200 in penalties in 3 of the 6 cases, all in 2003.
section_title: Conclusion and Recommendations
paragraphs: We found that Labor—in coordination with Homeland Security—could  provide better oversight of employers’ compliance with H-1B visa program  requirements.  Even though Labor’s authority to review applications is  limited, it is certifying some applications that do not meet program  requirements or have inaccurate information. Additionally, USCIS may  find information in the materials submitted by an H-1B employer that  indicates the employer is not complying with the program requirements.  However, these employers may not face consequences because USCIS  does not have a formal mechanism for reporting this information to Labor,  and current law restricts Labor from using such evidence to initiate an  investigation. USCIS also has an opportunity to improve its oversight by  matching information from its petition database with Labor’s application  case number to detect whether employers are requesting more H-1B  workers than they were originally certified to hire. As Congress  deliberates changes to U.S. immigration policy, it is essential to ensure  that employers comply with program requirements designed to protect  both domestic and H-1B workers.
To increase employer compliance with the H-1B program and protect the  rights of U.S. and H-1B workers, Congress should consider the following  two actions:
Eliminate the restrictions on Labor using petition information  submitted by employers to Homeland Security as the basis for  initiating an investigation, and
Direct Homeland Security to provide Labor with information  received during the adjudication process that may indicate whether  an employer is fulfilling its H-1B responsibilities.
Further, we recommend that Labor strengthen its oversight of employers’  applications to hire H-1B workers by improving its procedures for  checking for completeness and obvious inaccuracies, including developing  more stringent, cost-effective methods of checking for wage inaccuracies  and invalid employer identification numbers. We also recommend that  USCIS ensure employers’ compliance with the program requirements by  including Labor’s application case number in its new information  technology system, so that adjudicators are able to quickly and  independently ensure that employers are not requesting more H-1B  workers than were originally approved on their application to Labor.
We provided a draft of our report to the Departments of Labor, Homeland  Security, and Justice for their review and comments. Each agency  provided technical comments, which we incorporated as appropriate.  Justice did not have formal comments on our report.
Homeland Security agreed with our recommendations, and stated that  USCIS intends to include Labor’s application case number in its new  information technology system.
Labor questioned whether our recommendation for more stringent  application review measures is supported by the low error rate that we  found, as well as whether the benefits of instituting such measures would  equal or exceed the added costs of implementing them. In addition, Labor  said that Congress intentionally limited the scope of Labor’s application  review in order to place the focus for achieving program integrity on  USCIS.
We believe that Labor is at risk of certifying H-1B applications that contain  more errors than were found in the scope of our review. For example, we  checked only for employer identification numbers with invalid prefix  codes, and did not look for other combinations of invalid numbers or data.  Therefore, we do not know the true magnitude of the error rate in the  certification process.  We continue to believe there are cost-effective  methods that Labor could use to check the applications more stringently  that would enhance the integrity of the H-1B process.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared statement. I would be happy to  respond to any questions you or other Members of the Subcommittee may  have at this time.
section_title: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments
paragraphs: For information regarding this testimony, please contact Sigurd R. Nilsen,  Director, Education, Workforce, and Income Security Issues, on   202-512-7215. Individuals making key contributions to this testimony  include: Alicia Puente Cackley, Gretta L. Goodwin, Amy J. Anderson,  Pawnee A. Davis, Sheila McCoy and Rachael C. Valliere.
section_title: Related GAO Products
paragraphs: H-1B Visa Program: Labor Could Improve Its Oversight and Increase  Information Sharing with Homeland Security. GAO-06-720. Washington,  D.C.: June 22, 2006.
Homeland Security: Better Management Practices Could Enhance DHS’s  Ability to Allocate Investigative Resources. GAO-06-462T. Washington,  D.C.: March 28, 2006.
Immigration Benefits: Additional Controls and a Sanctions Strategy  Could Enhance DHS’s Ability to Control Benefit Fraud. GAO-06-259.  Washington, D.C.: March 10, 2006.
Homeland Security: Visitor and Immigrant Status Program Operating,  but Management Improvements Are Still Needed. GAO-06-318T.  Washington, D.C.: January 25, 2006.
Immigration Benefits: Improvements Needed to Address Backlogs and  Ensure Quality of Adjudications. GAO-06-20. Washington, D.C.:  November 21, 2005.
Immigration Enforcement: Weaknesses Hinder Employment  Verification and Worksite Enforcement Efforts. GAO-05-813. Washington,  D.C.: August 31, 2005.
Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration  Services: Allocation of Additional H-1B Visas Created by the H-1B Visa  Reform Act of 2004. GAO-05-705R. Washington, D.C.: May 18, 2005.
Homeland Security: Some Progress Made, but Many Challenges Remain  on U.S. Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology Program.  GAO-05-202. Washington, DC: February 23, 2005.
Alien Registration: Usefulness of a Nonimmigrant Alien Annual  Address Reporting Requirement Is Questionable. GAO-05-204.  Washington, D.C.: January 28, 2005.
Highlights of a GAO Forum: Workforce Challenges and Opportunities  For the 21st Century: Changing Labor Force Dynamics and the Role of  Government Policies. GAO-04-845SP. Washington, D.C.: June 1, 2004.
H-1B Foreign Workers: Better Tracking Needed to Help Determine H-1B  Program’s Effects on U.S. Workforce. GAO-03-883. Washington, D.C.:  September 10, 2003.
Information Technology: Homeland Security Needs to Improve Entry  Exit System Expenditure Planning. GAO-03-563. Washington, D.C.:   June 9, 2003.
High-Skill Training: Grants from H-1B Visa Fees Meet Specific  Workforce Needs, but at Varying Skill Levels. GAO-02-881. Washington,  D.C.: September 20, 2002.
Immigration Benefits: Several Factors Impede Timeliness of Application  Processing. GAO-01-488. Washington, D.C.: May 4, 2001.
H-1B Foreign Workers: Better Controls Needed to Help Employers and  Protect Workers. GAO/HEHS-00-157. Washington, D.C.: September 7, 2000.
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the  United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further  permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or  other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to  reproduce this material separately.