Immigration Benefits: Several Factors Impede Timeliness of	 
Application Processing (04-MAY-01, GAO-01-488). 		 
								 
Congress, the media, and immigrant advocacy groups  have	 
criticized the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) for  
its inability to provide immigrants with timely decisions on	 
their applications for such benefits as naturalization and legal 
permanent residence. INS continues to experience significant	 
problems managing its application workload despite years of	 
increasing budgets and staff. Automation improvements would	 
provide INS with the management information it needs to determine
how long aliens have been waiting for their applications to be	 
processed. Automation improvement would also help INS determine  
whether it is processing all the applications it receives,	 
working on applications in the order in which they are received, 
and providing prompt and correct responses to applicants'	 
inquiries about the status of their cases. INS does not know how 
to maximize the deployment of staff to process applications in a 
timely fashion because it lacks a systematically developed staff 
resource allocation model. Such a model could help INS determine 
the right number and types of staff it needs, efficiently	 
distribute staff to the right locations, and ensure that	 
resources are deployed commensurate with the workload to minimize
backlogs and processing times. INS could reduce the need to	 
revoke employment authorization documents by providing guiding	 
and training on application screening to its district staff and  
taking steps to ascertain whether improvements could be made to  
the application screening process. INS' long-standing problems	 
with its fingerprinting process appear to have been largely	 
corrected. With digital technology now being used by INS to	 
fingerprint aliens and transmit the fingerprints electronically  
to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, opportunities may exist  
to store the fingerprints electronically and save the time and	 
expense associated with the refingerprinting process.		 
-------------------------Indexing Terms------------------------- 
REPORTNUM:   GAO-01-488 					        
    ACCNO:   A00911						        
  TITLE:     Immigration Benefits: Several Factors Impede Timeliness  
             of Application Processing                                        
     DATE:   05/04/2001 
  SUBJECT:   Immigration information systems			 
	     Naturalization					 
	     Human resources utilization			 
	     Aliens						 
	     Projections					 
	     INS Immigration Examination Fee Account		 
	     INS Adjudications and Naturalization		 
	     Program						 
								 
	     INS Computer Linked Application			 
	     Information Management System 4.0			 
								 
	     INS Computer Linked Application			 
	     Information Management System 3.0			 
								 
	     INS Reengineered Naturalization			 
	     Applications Casework System			 
								 

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO Testimony.                                               **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
******************************************************************
GAO-01-488
     
Report to Congressional Requesters

United States General Accounting Office

GAO

May 2001 IMMIGRATION BENEFITS

Several Factors Impede Timeliness of Application Processing

GAO- 01- 488

Page i GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness Letter 1

Appendix I: List of INS Applications and Petitions Processed at the Service
Centers, Districts, and Application Support Centers 51

Appendix II: Description of Major INS Application and Petition Forms 53
Appendix III: INS Naturalization and Adjustment of Status Processing

Flowcharts 54 Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major Types of Applications
60 Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field Offices Visited 80 Appendix
VI: INS Valuation Study Results on Pending Application Wait Times

for Selected Field Offices 110 Appendix VII: Comments From the Department of
Justice 113 Appendix VIII: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments 114 Tables

Table 1: Funding Sources for INS? Adjudications and Naturalization Program
10 Table 2: Onboard Adjudications Staff 11 Table 3: Applications INS
Received by Application Type 13 Table 4: Applications INS Completed by
Application Type 15 Contents

Page ii GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Table 5: Backlog of Pending Applications by Application Type 16 Table 6:
INS? Production Goals for Naturalization Applications

(Form N- 400) 17 Table 7: INS Production Goals for Applications for
Adjustment of

Status (Form I- 485) 19 Table 8: Valuation Study Results on Wait Times
Associated With

Pending Applications as of September 30, 2000 29 Table 9: California Service
Center 80 Table 10: Vermont Service Center 85 Table 11: Chicago District 90
Table 12: Houston District 95 Table 13: Los Angeles District 100 Table 14:
Miami District 105 Table 15: Valuation Study Results on Wait Times for
Naturalization

Applications (Form N- 400) 110 Table 16: Valuation Study Results on Wait
Times for Application

for Adjustment of Status (Form I- 485) 111 Table 17: Valuation Study Results
on Wait Times for Application to

Replace Permanent Resident Card (Form I- 90) 111 Table 18: Valuation Study
Results on Wait Times for Petition for

Alien Relative (Form I- 130) 112 Table 19: Valuation Study Results on Wait
Time for Application to

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

Figures

Figure 1: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Naturalization Applications
(Form N- 400) 18 Figure 2: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Applications
for

Adjustment of Status (Form I- 485) 20 Figure 3: Backlog of Applications
Associated With Adjustment of

Status Applications (Form I- 485) 21 Figure 4: Backlog of Applications for
Employment Authorization

(Form I- 765) and Travel Document (Form I- 131) 22 Figure 5: INS? Estimates
of Processing Time Based on the Last 3

Months of Fiscal Years 1996- 2000 25 Figure 6: Application for
Naturalization (Form N- 400) Flowchart 54 Figure 7: District Application for
Adjustment of Status (Form- 485)

Flowchart for Family- Based Applications 56 Figure 8: Service Center
Application for Adjustment of Status

(Form I- 485) Flowchart for Employment- Based Applications 58 Figure 9:
Application for Naturalization (Form N- 400) Workload

Compared to Completions 60

Page iii GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 10: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Applications for
Naturalization (Form N- 400) 61 Figure 11: Application for Adjustment of
Status (Form I- 485)

Workload Compared to Completions 62 Figure 12: Officer Workyears Spent
Processing Adjustment of

Status Applications (Form I- 485) 63 Figure 13: Application to Replace
Permanent Residence Card

(Form I- 90) Workload Compared to Completions 64 Figure 14: Officer
Workyears Spent Processing Applications to

Replace Permanent Residence Card (Form I- 90) 65 Figure 15: Petition for
Nonimmigrant Worker (Form I- 129)

Workload Compared to Completions 66 Figure 16: Officer Workyears Spent
Processing Petitions for

Nonimmigrant Worker (Form I- 129) 67 Figure 17: Petition for Alien Relative
(Form I- 130) Workload

Compared to Completions 68 Figure 18: Officer Workyears Spent Processing
Petitions for Alien

Relative (Form I- 130) 69 Figure 19: Application for Travel Document (Form
I- 131) Workload

Compared to Completions 70 Figure 20: Officer Workyears Spent Processing
Applications for

Travel Document (Form I- 131) 71 Figure 21: Immigrant Petition for Alien
Worker (Form I- 140)

Workload Compared to Completions 72 Figure 22: Officer Workyears Spent
Processing Immigrant Petitions

for Alien Worker (Form I- 140) 73 Figure 23: Petition to Extend/ Change
Nonimmigrant Status (Form

I- 539) Workload Compared to Completions 74 Figure 24: Officer Workyears
Spent Processing Petitions to

Extend/ Change Nonimmigrant Status (Form I- 539) 75 Figure 25: Petition to
Remove Conditions on Residence (Form I751) Workload Compared to Completions
76 Figure 26: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Petitions to

Remove Conditions on Residence (Form I- 751) 77 Figure 27: Application for
Employment Authorization (Form I- 765)

Workload Compared to Completions 78 Figure 28: Officer Workyears Spent
Processing Applications for

Employment Authorization (Form I- 765) 79

Page iv GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness Abbreviations

ASC Application Support Center BETS Buffalo Exams and Tracking System CLAIMS
Computer Linked Application Information Management System

FBI Federal Bureau of Investigation IEFA Immigration Examinations Fee
Account INS Immigration and Naturalization Service IRCA Immigration Reform
and Control Act ISD Immigration Services Division LIFE Legal Immigration and
Family Equity Act NCSC National Customer Service Center RNACS Reengineered
Naturalization Applications Casework

System

Page 1 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

May 4, 2001 The Honorable James F. Sensenbrenner, Jr. Chairman, Committee on
the Judiciary House of Representatives

The Honorable George W. Gekas Chairman, Subcommittee on Immigration and
Claims Committee on the Judiciary House of Representatives

The Honorable Jim Turner House of Representatives

The Honorable Judy Biggert House of Representatives

INS has been criticized by Congress, the media, and immigrant advocacy
groups for its inability to provide immigrants with timely decisions on
their applications for such benefits as naturalization and legal permanent
residence. In 1996, the integrity of INS? naturalization process came under
fire because in an effort to reduce a backlog in applications, INS was
naturalizing aliens without first completing criminal history background
checks. In response, INS implemented quality improvement measures in 1997
and 1998 to enhance and monitor the quality of its naturalization process.
These efforts, however, contributed to further backlogs that reached a high
of 1.8 million naturalization applications 1 by the end of fiscal year 1998.
INS continues to struggle with large application backlogs and lengthy
processing times. In some locations, applicants must wait 2 years or longer
for INS to adjudicate applications for benefits.

You asked us to review INS? application workload, quantify the resources
expended adjudicating applications, determine the factors affecting INS?
ability to process applications, and identify INS actions to improve
processing. This report addresses the following questions:

1 INS receives both applications and petitions from immigrants and U. S.
citizens. Immigrants submit applications to INS when they seek benefits for
themselves, such as U. S. citizenship. Petitions are filed on behalf of
aliens, such as when employers petition on behalf of employees or parents
petition on behalf of children. For purposes of this report, the term
?application? is used to refer both to applications and petitions.

United States General Accounting Office Washington, DC 20548

Page 2 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

1. Since 1994, to what extent have INS? adjudications budget, staffing, and
workload changed?

2. Since 1994, to what extent has INS experienced backlogs in processing
applications for immigration benefits?

3. How long does it take INS to process applications from the time the
application is received until it is completed?

4. What factors affect INS? application backlogs and processing times, and
what actions has INS taken or planned to address them?

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

Although INS has experienced substantial growth in its budget and staff, it
continues to have difficulty managing its application workload. INS?
Adjudications and Naturalization program budget, comprised largely of fees
paid by applicants, has nearly quadrupled since fiscal year 1994 to nearly
$500 million. The size of its program staff has more than doubled since
fiscal year 1995 to about 6,100. In fiscal year 2000, INS received nearly 50
percent more applications than in fiscal year 1994, while its application
backlog increased nearly four- fold to about 3.9 million during the same
time period. INS? efforts to meet production goals for processing
naturalization and adjustment of status applications helped reduce backlogs
in those areas, but backlogs for other application types then increased.

INS does not know how long it takes to process aliens? applications because
its available servicewide automated systems contain unreliable data and its
districts do not have automated systems for tracking many types of
applications. A recent physical inventory of pending applications revealed
that about 767,000 out of almost 3 million applicants with applications
pending as of September 30, 2000, had been waiting at least 21 months for
INS to process their naturalization, legal permanent residence, and other
immigration- related applications. To minimize wait times for employment
benefits, INS has implemented a policy that provides permission to work to
aliens who are awaiting a decision on their application for adjustment of
status to legal permanent residence. However, thousands of applicants who
were granted employment authorization by INS are denied adjustment of status
each year, meaning that they also cannot work in the United States and that
their work Results in Brief

Page 3 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

authorization needs to be revoked. For other application types, the
uncertainty caused by lengthy processing times has reportedly disrupted many
applicants? lives.

INS officials identified three factors as impeding INS? ability to reduce
backlogs, improve processing times, and effectively manage its workload:

 Automation: INS districts lack an automated case management and tracking
system for application types other than naturalization. As a result, INS
cannot readily determine (1) the size and status of its pending workload;
(2) application processing times; (3) the existence of processing
bottlenecks; (4) how to deploy staff based on workload and backlogs; or (5)
whether applications are processed in the order in which they are received.

 Staffing: INS officials say they need additional staff to keep up with a
growing workload. However, they could not specify the types of staff needed
or where they should be located because they lack a staff resource
allocation model.

 Fingerprinting: Due to lengthy processing times, INS frequently does not
adjudicate cases within the 15- month period that the results of the Federal
Bureau of Investigation?s (FBI) fingerprint checks for criminal history are
valid. As a result, INS must incur the additional time and expense of
refingerprinting the individuals and sending the fingerprints to the FBI to
perform another criminal history check.

INS has taken or planned to take a number of actions to improve application
processing. It created the Office of Production Management in 1998, which
has established monthly production goals and accountability for field
offices. INS hopes to implement a single servicewide automated case
management and tracking system, and it is preparing a business plan and an
information technology strategy to guide immigration benefits reengineering
and information technology improvements over the next 5 to 10 years. In
response to our prior recommendations, INS is developing a blueprint for all
its automated system needs, and it is developing an information technology
investment management process. We believe these efforts are steps in the
right direction. Many of them, however, are still in planning stages, so it
is too early to tell whether and to what extent they will resolve INS?
application workload problems.

At the end of this letter, we make recommendations to INS regarding
calculating actual application processing times; developing guidance and
training for screening adjustment of status applications before issuing
temporary work authorization benefits, and monitoring the quality of this

Page 4 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

screening; developing a staffing model for processing applications; and
improving its fingerprinting procedures. The Department of Justice was
provided a draft of this report for comment and concurred with our
recommendations.

INS, through its Adjudications and Naturalization program, delivers various
immigration benefits and services to aliens, including naturalizing
immigrants, adjusting the status of immigrants to permanent residence,
providing employment authorization, and granting asylum. INS charges aliens
fees for processing their applications and deposits the fees into the
Immigration Examinations Fee Account (IEFA). This account was established in
1988 to reimburse any INS appropriation for expenses incurred in providing
adjudications and naturalization services. In 1990, Congress authorized INS
to set adjudications and naturalization fees at a level that would ensure
recovery of the full costs of providing services. 2 From fiscal year 1994 to
fiscal year 1996, the Adjudications and Naturalization budget was almost
entirely funded by IEFA. Beginning in fiscal year 1997 and continuing
through fiscal year 2000, Adjudications and Naturalization program funding
included direct appropriations, 3 in addition to IEFA funds, to reduce
application caseloads.

INS carries out its service function through a network of field offices
consisting of 4 service centers, 33 districts, and 75 application support
centers (ASCs). (App. I contains a list of applications and petitions
processed by the service centers, districts, and ASCs; and app. II contains

2 IEFA was established by the 1989 Department of Justice Appropriation Act
(P. L. 100- 459 (1988)), 8 U. S. C. 1356 (m), (n). The requirement to
recover the full costs of providing services was included in the 1991
Department of Justice Appropriation Act (P. L. 101- 515 (1990)). IEFA funds,
which account for approximately 18 percent of INS? budget, are disbursed to
many programs within INS, including Inspections, Investigations,
Intelligence, Construction and Engineering, Information and Records
Management, and Data and Communications.

3 For the most part, application fees deposited into IEFA cover application
processing activities. In some years, direct appropriations from the INS
Salaries and Expenses account are also provided for application processing.
The conference reports for each fiscal year accompanying the annual Justice
appropriations laws establish the spending level authority for the
activities funded by IEFA. If INS anticipates a need for a change in funding
authority as a result of high or lower- than- expected fee collections, then
INS is to prepare a reprogramming proposal for transmittal by Justice to the
Office of Management and Budget and, subsequently, to the congressional
appropriations committees with jurisdiction over Justice. Background

Page 5 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

a description of the major applications submitted to INS based on number
received or those of special interest that are cited in the report.)

 INS? four service centers are located in California, Nebraska, Texas, and
Vermont. They were created in 1990 to help reduce application backlogs in
the district offices. Service centers process 35 types of applications,
including petitions for permanent and temporary workers, petitions for
admission of spouses, and applications for employment- based adjustment of
status to permanent residence. Since February 1996, the service centers have
shared responsibility with the districts for processing naturalization
applications. Naturalization applications are received by the service
centers and processed up to the point of interview, at which time
responsibility for processing the case is shifted to the cognizant district
so that the applicant can be interviewed and the case decided.

 INS? 33 districts, consisting of a district office and in many cases
suboffices, are located throughout the nation. The districts process 42
types of applications, most of which require interviews with the applicant
or verification of an applicant?s identity. In addition to naturalization
applications, districts process petitions for alien relatives and family-
based adjustment of status applications, among others.

 INS? 75 application support centers are under the jurisdiction of
districts and are located throughout the nation. They were established in
fiscal year 1998 to serve as INS? designated fingerprint locations. 4 In
June 2000, INS shifted responsibility for processing applications for
renewal of permanent resident cards (i. e., green cards) from the districts
to ASCs. 5

INS? application processing procedures vary by application type and by
office. In general, the following tasks are involved in processing an
application: (1) collect and deposit the application fee and issue a receipt
to the alien; (2) create an alien file, or request an existing alien file;
(3) enter data on the applicant into an automated system (if available); (4)
take applicant?s fingerprints and send them to the FBI for a criminal
history check (if needed); (5) review the application, and other supporting
documents, such as FBI fingerprint check results, marriage certificate, or

4 To accommodate the minority of cases in which applicants would have to
travel more than 100 miles to an ASC, INS also established fingerprint
operations in 52 district offices and suboffices, developed agreements with
approximately 40 law enforcement agencies, and established 44 mobile routes
with 82 service points.

5 In 1989, INS set a 10- year limit on the validity of alien permanent
resident cards. They began to expire in fiscal year 2000.

Page 6 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

court disposition of an arrest; (6) interview the applicant (if needed); (7)
administer naturalization test (if needed); (8) approve or deny the case;
(9) notify applicant of INS? decision; and (10) update INS? automated
systems (if available). (App. III contains flowcharts depicting INS? process
for adjudicating naturalization and adjustment of status applications.)

While INS processes about 50 different types of immigration applications,
two types- naturalization and adjustment of status applications accounted
for more than 46 percent of INS? application backlog in fiscal year 2000.
The number of these applications increased dramatically during the 1990s
due, in part, to two pieces of legislation. First, under the Immigration
Reform and Control Act (IRCA) of 1986, INS created a program to legalize the
status of certain illegal aliens who had resided in the United States
continuously since January 1, 1982. 6 As a result, nearly 3 million illegal
immigrants became legal permanent residents, 7 and by February 1995, they
were eligible to apply for citizenship. Second, under Section 245( i) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act, certain illegal aliens residing in the
United States (e. g., non- immigrants with expired visas) were allowed to
adjust their status to legal permanent residence without returning overseas.
8 This provision, which was enacted in 1994, resulted in a surge of
adjustment of status applications during fiscal years 1995 through 1997. 9
(Statistics on the number of applications received by INS in each of fiscal
years 1994 through 2000 are provided in table 3 on p. 13.)

To address the surge in naturalization applications, in August 1995 INS
launched the Citizenship USA (CUSA) initiative. INS had projected that
without a serious effort to reduce the backlog of naturalization
applications, by the summer of 1996 an eligible applicant would have to wait
3 years to be naturalized as a U. S. citizen. The stated goal of CUSA

6 P. L. 99- 603, 8 USC 1324a et seq. 7 These illegal immigrants were first
?legalized? and granted temporary legal residence status. After 18- 30
months as temporary legal residents, they were able to apply for permanent
legal residence.

8 1995 Department of Justice Appropriation Act (P. L. 103- 317 (1994)). 9
The 1994 provision was amended by the 1998 Department of Justice
Appropriation Act (P. L. 105- 119 (1997)), to provide that only aliens who
were beneficiaries of an immigration petition or labor certification
application on or before Jan. 14, 1998, would be eligible for adjustment
under 245( i). The Legal Immigration and Family Equity Act (P. L. 106- 553),
enacted on Dec. 21, 2000, extended the Jan. 14, 1998, date to Apr. 30,
2001.) Section 245( i), as amended, is codified at 8 U. S. C. 1255i.

Page 7 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

was to reduce the naturalization application backlog to the point where
eligible applicants would be naturalized within 6 months of their submitting
naturalization applications. The CUSA initiative was found to be fraught
with quality and integrity problems that resulted in ineligible applicants
receiving citizenship. According to a recent Department of Justice report,
10 INS made the timely completion of naturalization cases its guiding
principle during its citizenship initiative at the expense of accuracy and
integrity in the determination of eligibility. In response to the problems
that arose, INS implemented naturalization quality procedures in November
1996, which were designed to achieve consistent and complete processing
through revised fingerprint check procedures, the use of work sheets and
standardized documentation for each file, enhanced supervisory review, and a
standardized quality assurance program.

In 1997, INS established the Office of Naturalization Operations, now named
the Immigration Services Division (ISD). The role of the office is to help
restore integrity and credibility to naturalization processing procedures,
and to reduce naturalization backlogs. The office contracted with
PricewaterhouseCoopers for a plan to reengineer the naturalization process
and, in September 1997, the contractor issued its proposed plan, which INS
is in the process of implementing. Improvements that have been made include
performing a complete file review of cases before applicants are scheduled
for interviews, developing a National Customer Service Center with a 1- 800
phone line for information, and creating and distributing a ?Guide to
Naturalization? for use by applicants.

As agreed with your offices, this report addresses the following: (1) Since
1994, to what extent have INS? adjudications budget, staffing, and workload
changed? (2) Since 1994, to what extent has INS experienced backlogs in
processing aliens? applications for immigration benefits? (3) How long does
it take INS to process applications from the time the application is
received until it is completed? (4) What factors affect INS? application
backlogs and processing times, and what actions has INS taken or planned to
address them? and (5) What other actions has INS taken or planned to improve
application processing?

10 An Investigation of the Immigration and Naturalization Service?s
Citizenship USA Initiative (Office of Inspector General, U. S. Department of
Justice, July 31, 2000). Objectives, Scope,

and Methodology

Page 8 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

To address our first two reporting questions- the extent to which INS?
budget, staffing, and workload have changed and the extent which INS has
experienced backlogs- we analyzed INS budget and staffing data, including
data on INS? contracts supporting adjudications activities. We also analyzed
workload data from INS? Performance Analysis System, which is INS? primary
system for recording the size of its workload. We interviewed INS field and
headquarters staff regarding the collection and analysis of the workload
data. We also reviewed Inspector General reports regarding the reliability
of INS workload data and held discussions with Justice Inspector General
staff regarding their reports. Questions have been raised about the
reliability of INS? data on applications received, completed, and pending.
However, INS officials maintain that they are the only data currently
available and are useful for discerning trends in application workload. We
rounded the numbers to the nearest thousand when presenting workload data in
order to reduce the impression that the data are precise.

To answer question 3, regarding how long it takes INS to process
applications, we reviewed the methods INS has used to estimate and report
processing times. We interviewed field and headquarters staff about how
these data were being collected, monitored, and disseminated. We reviewed
and analyzed INS? application inventory valuation study, which estimated the
age of INS? pending workload for selected types of applications as of
September 30, 2000. We also interviewed representatives of community- based
organizations to obtain information about their experiences with INS and how
INS? processing delays have impacted their clients. In this review, we
focused on the amount of time that elapsed between INS receiving and
completing the processing of an application, not on the amount of staff time
expended by INS to process individual applications.

To address the last two questions- factors that affect INS? application
backlogs and processing times and actions that INS has taken or planned to
improve application processing- we interviewed INS officials in
headquarters, as well as in six field offices- the California Service Center
in Laguna Niguel; the Vermont Service Center in St. Albans; and district
offices in Los Angeles, Chicago, Miami, and Houston. We chose these
locations because they were identified as offices handling a large volume of
applications and backlogs. Together, these two service centers and four
districts accounted for 47 percent of all applications received by INS in
fiscal year 2000. We reviewed planning documents, including reports
regarding improvements to INS processes. In this review, we focused on

Page 9 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

application backlogs and processing times and did not conduct analyses of
the integrity of INS? processing efforts.

We conducted our work from February 2000 through March 2001 in accordance
with generally accepted government auditing standards. We requested comments
on a draft of this report from the Attorney General. The INS Executive
Associate Commissioner for Field Operations provided written comments, which
are summarized at the end of this letter and reproduced in appendix VII.

INS? Adjudications and Naturalization program budget, funded primarily by
fees, has increased significantly since fiscal year 1994. The largest
increase occurred in fiscal year 1996, when INS hired over 900 temporary
officer and support staff to reduce application backlogs. Staffing data for
each of the six field offices that we visited are presented in appendix V.

INS? Adjudications and Naturalization program budget almost quadrupled from
$129 million in fiscal year 1994 to $496 million in fiscal year 2000. As
shown in table 1, the majority of funding has been from fees INS charged
applicants for processing their applications and deposited into the IEFA.
Beginning in fiscal year 1997, INS? IEFA funds were supplemented with direct
appropriations. For fiscal years 1997 and 1998, INS received appropriated
funds to support backlog reduction and improve the integrity of the
naturalization process. For fiscal years 1999 and 2000, these appropriated
funds were generally used to reduce application backlogs. 11

11 According to INS officials, INS used the appropriated funds to hire
officers in temporary positions; to contract for clerical support in
districts, service centers, and application support centers; to contract for
studies to reengineer the application process; to fund staff overtime; and
to expand the National Customer Service Center, among other things. INS?
Adjudications

and Naturalization Program Budget and Staffing Have Substantially Increased

Page 10 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

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

Dollars in thousands

Fiscal year Funding source 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

enacted 2001 appropriated

IEFA funds $126,313 $168,523 $276,272 $302,663 $360,992 $363,871 $407,605
$457,362 Other fee accounts a 2,885 2,652 1,163 1,182 1,031 754 1,125 1,125
Appropriated funds b b b 5,916 c 16,687 c 75,788 c 86,896 d 41,621 e

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

a Includes Legalization, H1- B, and other immigration fee account funds. b
The Adjudications and Naturalization program did not receive direct
appropriations these years. c According to an INS official, INS received
these funds to reduce application backlogs and improve the integrity of the
naturalization process. These funds were used to fund staff overtime, fund
contracts for clerical staff, and reengineer the naturalization process. d
The total amount of direct appropriated funding was $176 million in fiscal
year 1999 and $124.2

million in fiscal year 2000. According to INS officials, these funds were
used to hire temporary officers to reduce application backlogs, to expand
the National Customer Service Center, to conduct a fingerprint verification
project, to fund staff overtime, and to upgrade computer systems, among
other things. e According to an INS official, $35 million is being used to
fund contracts for clerical support in INS? service centers, and about $6
million is being used for the maintenance and repair of digital
fingerprinting machines used by ASCs.

Source: GAO analysis of INS data.

Overall, the total number of onboard program staff more than doubled between
fiscal years 1995 and 2000. 12 As shown in table 2, the number of
adjudications officers increased 78 percent (from 1,277 to 2,278 officers)
and INS support staff increased by 60 percent (from 1,037 to 1,664 clerks).
The overwhelming majority of the growth in INS staff occurred in fiscal year
1996. Between fiscal years 1996 and 2000, the number of contractor support
staff for the Adjudications and Naturalization program increased by 86
percent (from 1,158 to 2,154 clerks).

12 INS officials did not have detailed servicewide staffing data available
before fiscal year 1995 because staffing was managed at the field office
level. The exact growth in program staff cannot be determined because INS
did not have records on the number of contractor staff who provided clerical
support services prior to fiscal year 1996.

Page 11 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Table 2: Onboard Adjudications Staff INS adjudications officers b INS
support staff c Contractor

support staff Fiscal year a Permanent Temporary d Total Permanent Temporary
e Total Total

Grand total

1995 1,273 4 1, 277 847 190 1,037 f 2,314 1996 1,419 497 1,916 971 736 1,707
1,158 4,781 1997 1,436 442 1,878 981 701 1,682 1,340 4,900 1998 1,692 408
2,100 1,049 633 1,682 1,584 5,366 1999 1,788 522 2,310 1,161 495 1,656 2,110
6,076 2000 1,954 324 2,278 1,124 540 1,664 2,154 6,096

Note: Staff onboard as of the end of each fiscal year. a Detailed staffing
data were not available for fiscal year 1994.

b Includes adjudications officers and supervisory adjudications officers. c
Includes applications clerks, office automation clerks, secretaries, and
clerk typists d Includes term appointments (up to 4 years) and rehired
annuitants. e Includes term appointments (up to 4 years), rehired
annuitants, and temporary appointments (up to 2 years). f INS did not have
contractor support staffing data available for fiscal year 1995.

Source: GAO analysis of INS data.

Table 2 also shows the growth in the number of adjudications officers and
INS clerical support staff in both permanent and temporary positions. The
number of officers in permanent positions increased 53 percent (from 1,273
to 1,954 officers) between fiscal years 1995 and 2000. The number of
officers and INS support staff in temporary positions grew primarily in
fiscal year 1996 due to additional funding to process application backlogs.
Of about 6,100 program staff who were onboard in fiscal year 2000, about
half were in temporary or contractor positions.

INS officials told us that by using temporary adjudications staff, INS can
more easily reassign temporary positions from one field office to another
based on application processing needs. In addition to the INS support staff,
INS contracted for clerical support for its service centers beginning in
fiscal year 1996, and for its districts beginning in fiscal year 1998. At
the end of fiscal year 2000, INS had 341 contract clerical support staff in
the districts and 1,813 in service centers. Contract clerical personnel were
to support the processing of naturalization and adjustment of status
applications. Clerical support staff duties included data entry, scheduling
appointments for applicants, file operations, courier services, and
naturalization ceremony support. In fiscal year 2000, INS spent almost $64

Page 12 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

million for contracts to provide clerical services in their service centers
and districts.

Although there were year- to- year variations in INS? workload- that is, the
number of applications of different types that INS received and completed-
INS? workload in fiscal year 2000 was generally larger than in 1994. An
exception was new naturalization applications, which were fewer in fiscal
year 2000 than in fiscal year 1994. However, INS completed more
naturalization applications in fiscal year 2000 than in 5 of the previous 6
years.

The size and nature of INS? application workload are not known exactly
because INS? workload data are not accurate. The Justice Inspector General
has reported that INS? Adjudications and Naturalization workload data
contain errors, are inadequately monitored, and cannot be audited because
they cannot be traced back to individual applications. INS officials with
whom we spoke acknowledged that INS? workload data are not precise, but they
maintained that they are useful for understanding workload trends.
Therefore, the workload figures presented in this section should be used
with caution and have been rounded to the nearest thousand to reflect their
lack of precision. (Workload data for each of the six field offices that we
visited are presented in app. V.)

Between fiscal years 1994 to 2000, the total number of applications received
by INS increased by about 50 percent to more than 6 million, as shown in
table 3. Generally, from fiscal years 1994 to 1997, most types of
applications submitted increased steadily. Naturalization applications
peaked at about 1.4 million in fiscal year 1997, then declined substantially
each subsequent year to about 461,000 in fiscal year 2000. The number of
naturalization applications that INS received in fiscal year 2000 was about
15 percent less than in fiscal year 1994 and about 67 percent less than the
high of 1.4 million in fiscal year 1997. Adjustment of status applications
peaked at about 760,000 in fiscal year 1997, declined in fiscal years 1998
and 1999, and again increased in fiscal year 2000. Receipts of most other
types of applications were greater in fiscal year 2000 than in fiscal year
1994.

For example, employment authorization applications (form I- 765) doubled
between fiscal year 1994 and 2000, and accounted for nearly one- fourth of
the total number of applications that INS received in fiscal year 2000. As
discussed on page 21 and 22, lengthy adjustment of status processing INS?
Adjudications

and Naturalization Workload Has Varied, But Exact Size and Nature of
Workload Are Not Known

Annual Number of Applications Received by INS Has Varied Over Time

Page 13 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

times can contribute to the number of employment authorization applications
that aliens submit to INS. This can occur because INS provides employment
authorization for 1 year but may take longer than a year to adjudicate an
adjustment of status application, prompting the alien to submit a new
application for employment authorization.

Table 3: Applications INS Received by Application Type

In thousands

Fiscal year Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) 543 960 1,277 1,413 933 765 461
Application for adjustment of status (I- 485) 317 578 647 760 527 456 562
Application to replace permanent resident card (I- 90) 544 461 409 321 336
360 705 Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I- 129) 303 273 274 312 383 502
721 Petition for alien relative (I- 130) 663 630 709 886 743 466 598
Application for travel document (I- 131) 281 283 335 385 453 449 522
Immigrant petition for alien worker (I- 140) 47 52 61 69 68 79 96
Application to extend or change nonimmigrant status (I- 539) 227 203 213 239
262 380 393 Petition to remove conditions on residence (I- 751) 110 118 120
103 131 117 112 Application for employment authorization (I- 765) 707 865
953 1,161 1,212 1,357 1,451 All other application types 394 458 450 630 516
467 437

Total a 4,138 4,879 5,447 6,277 5,563 5,399 6,059

a Sum of columns may not equal totals due to rounding. Source: INS
Performance Analysis System.

According to INS officials and community- based organization representatives
with whom we spoke, the increase in naturalization applications between
fiscal years 1994 and 1997 was due, in part, to three factors. First,
approximately 3 million aliens who had been granted amnesty through the
Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 were eligible to apply for
naturalization by February 1995. Second, INS instituted a requirement that
by March 1996, permanent resident aliens had to replace their existing alien
registration card with another card with increased security features. Since
the cost difference between the replacement card and the naturalization
application was small, many aliens may have decided at that time to apply
for naturalization. Third, a number of congressional proposals and a
California ballot proposition making certain governmental health, welfare,
and educational benefits contingent on U. S. citizenship may have provided
an incentive to aliens to apply for naturalization.

Page 14 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Some community- based organization representatives expressed the view that
the decline in the number of new naturalization applications since fiscal
year 1997 may have been due to publicity about the long waiting periods
aliens faced before INS adjudicated their applications. In addition, INS
raised the fee for naturalization applications in January 1999 and for most
other application types in October 1998, and this may have discouraged
potential applicants from applying.

The total number of applications INS completed (approved and denied) has
varied by type, but overall, increased from about 3. 9 million in fiscal
year 1994 to nearly 6.5 million in fiscal year 2000. 13 (See table 4.) The
number of completed naturalization applications almost tripled from about
444,000 in fiscal year 1994 to a high of slightly over 1.3 million in fiscal
year 1996, when INS? efforts to reduce backlogs through its CUSA initiative
were underway. As INS began its quality improvement measures to address
identified weaknesses in CUSA, completions declined to about 713,000 and
611,000 in fiscal years 1997 and 1998, respectively. Then, as it renewed its
efforts to reduce its naturalization backlogs, INS more than doubled the
number of completed applications in fiscal years 1999 and 2000, completing
nearly 1.3 million applications in each of those years. INS completed more
naturalization applications in fiscal year 2000 than in 5 of the previous 6
years.

INS completed greater numbers of adjustment of status applications in fiscal
years 1995 and 1996 relative to 1994 as seen in table 4. For the following 3
years, however, INS completed increasingly fewer applications. In fiscal
year 1999, INS completed about 300,000 adjustment of status applications,
fewer than in any prior year since fiscal year 1994. In fiscal year 2000,
INS made the processing of these applications a priority and nearly doubled
its completion level, reaching a 7- year high of more than 560,000 completed
applications.

13 INS officials told us that the time it takes to complete applications
varies because some types are more complex than others. For example, an
application to replace a permanent resident card (form I- 90) is relatively
simple, while an application to adjust to permanent residence status (form
I- 485) is more complex. Annual Number of

Applications Completed by INS Has Varied Over Time

Page 15 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Table 4: Applications INS Completed by Application Type

In thousands

Fiscal year Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) 444 506 1,334 713 611 1,252 1,298
Application for adjustment of status (I- 485) 342 358 542 478 416 300 564
Application to replace permanent resident card (I- 90) 443 543 487 260 146
259 718 Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I- 129) 319 273 300 327 385 527
698 Petition for alien relative (I- 130) 619 629 758 764 593 450 383
Application for travel document (I- 131) 264 283 331 356 507 398 468
Immigrant petition for alien worker (I- 140) 52 55 64 69 54 59 98
Application to extend or change nonimmigrant status (I- 539) 249 212 235 234
227 307 383 Petition to remove conditions on residence (I- 751) 106 107 123
106 96 99 96 Application for employment authorization (I- 765) 680 847 939
1,106 1,228 1,258 1,392 All other application types 393 452 433 541 429 310
388

Total a 3,912 4,265 5,547 4,954 4,693 5,219 6,487

a Sum of columns may not equal totals due to rounding. Source: INS
Performance Analysis System.

INS? total application backlog (pending applications) increased from about 1
million in fiscal year 1994 to almost 4 million in fiscal years 1998 through
2000. (See table 5.) INS? naturalization backlog more than doubled during
the same period. Since fiscal year 1998, however, the naturalization backlog
declined by more than half- from about 1.8 million pending applications in
fiscal year 1998 to about 817,000 in fiscal year 2000. As was the case with
INS? data on applications received and completed, INS? backlog figures may
be more useful for discerning trends than as precise measures of workload at
a given point in time.

As shown in table 5, the backlog of naturalization applications declined in
fiscal year 1999 and again in fiscal year 2000, whereas the backlog of
adjustment of status applications and most other types of applications
continued to increase. Naturalization

Backlogs Have Declined While Most Others Have Increased

Page 16 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Table 5: Backlog of Pending Applications by Application Type

In thousands

Fiscal year Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) 314 705 684 1,440 1,803 1,356 817
Application for adjustment of status (I- 485) 121 321 435 699 809 951 1,001
Application to replace permanent resident card (I- 90) 200 174 44 48 168 170
239 Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I- 129) 12 21 16 24 49 43 77 Petition
for alien relative (I- 130) 182 231 242 407 554 593 797 Application for
travel document (I- 131) 28 28 34 78 42 73 102 Immigrant petition for alien
worker (I- 140) 7 6 7 8 20 43 48 Application to extend or change
nonimmigrant status (I- 539) 17 31 17 32 75 176 178 Petition to remove
conditions on residence (I- 751) 23 28 27 35 68 76 99 Application for
employment authorization (I- 765) 44 70 77 135 115 186 256 All other
application types 40 52 69 144 189 305 276

Total a 987 1,668 1,652 3,051 3,891 3,973 3,892

Note: Number of applications pending at the end of each fiscal year.
According to an INS official, the total number of pending applications is
the sum of applications received (see table 3), plus applications reopened,
plus adjustments made as a result of audits, minus applications completed
for the fiscal year (see table 4). a Sum of columns may not equal totals due
to rounding.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System.

As a short- term solution to reduce its application backlogs, INS allocated
additional staff resources to process naturalization applications by
reassigning staff and using overtime. INS also set an annual production goal
for completing cases for the first time in fiscal year 1999. As shown in
table 6, INS? fiscal year 1999 and 2000 goals, respectively, were 1.2 and
1.3 million completed naturalization applications. INS met its goal in both
years. As shown in table 5, the number of pending naturalization
applications decreased from a high of about 1.8 million at the end of fiscal
year 1998 to about 817,000 at the end of fiscal year 2000. INS officials
told us that they are also planning to reengineer their processes to achieve
long- term solutions to managing their workload. These efforts are discussed
on p. 47.

Page 17 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

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

In thousands

Fiscal year Production goal Applications completed Result

1999 1,200 1,252 Met goal 2000 1,300 1,298 Met goal 2001 a 800 a According
to INS officials, the possibility of INS achieving its fiscal year 2001
production goal was contingent upon an assessment of the impact of the Legal
Immigration and Family Equity Act (LIFE), enacted on Dec. 21, 2000, on INS?
workload. The LIFE Act extends the eligibility date from Jan. 14, 1998, to
April 30, 2001, for applicants to apply for adjustment of status to legal
permanent residence without returning overseas. INS may revise this goal-
originally proposed in October 2000- later in fiscal year 2001.

Source: INS Office of Production Management.

The number of adjudications officer workyears spent processing
naturalization applications has increased in most years since fiscal year
1994. 14 In order to meet the production goals it set for itself in fiscal
years 1999 and 2000, INS devoted about 660 and 618 adjudications officer
workyears, respectively, to processing naturalization applications. 15
Figure 1 shows the officer workyears spent processing naturalization
applications during each of fiscal years 1994 though 2000.

14 There is not always a direct relationship between the number of INS
officer workyears spent processing naturalization applications and the
number of completed applications (see table 4) on a year to year basis. An
INS official told us that the number of officer hours could increase, while
the number of completions could decrease, due to changes in naturalization
application processes (e. g., naturalization quality procedures,
fingerprinting procedures) and training newly hired staff.

15 INS does not maintain data on the number of officers or clerical staff
assigned to process various types of applications. In order to make an
approximation of the amount of staff devoted to processing naturalization
applications, we analyzed hours recorded by officers in INS? Performance
Analysis System. Clerical hours could not be analyzed because contractor
clerical hours are not recorded by type of application processed.

Page 18 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 1: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Naturalization Applications
(Form N- 400)

Note: Data include adjudications officers? overtime but not the time they
spent on administrative activities (e. g., training or leave). According to
INS officials, data do not always include the time INS officers, such as
inspectors, were detailed to the Adjudications and Naturalization program
because INS did not consistently collect these data.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.

During the 2 years that INS was concentrating on meeting naturalization
production goals, the backlog of adjustment of status applications increased
from about 809,000 at the end of fiscal year 1998 to slightly over 1 million
in fiscal year 2000. Although INS also experienced increases in adjustment
of status application backlogs in fiscal years 1995 through 1997, these
increases were attributed to other factors. INS officials cited changes to
section 245( i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (see p. 6 for further
discussion) as a major reason for the adjustment of status application
backlog in the years before INS? naturalization initiatives. INS set
production goals for adjustment of status applications beginning in fiscal
year 1999. As shown in table 7, INS? goal was 361,000 in fiscal year 1999
and 500,000 in fiscal year 2000. INS fell short of the fiscal year 1999 goal
by about 60,000 applications because, according to INS officials, it

618 660

466 434

400 172 155 0 100

200 300

400 500

600 700

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of officer workyears Fiscal year

Page 19 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

was still giving priority to completing naturalization applications. INS did
meet its fiscal year 2000 production goal.

Table 7: INS Production Goals for Applications for Adjustment of Status
(Form I- 485)

In thousands

Fiscal year Production

goal Applications

completed Result

1999 361 300 Did not meet goal 2000 500 564 Met goal 2001 a 800 a According
to INS officials, the possibility of INS achieving its fiscal year 2001
production goal was contingent upon an assessment of the impact of the Legal
Immigration and Family Equity Act (passed on Dec. 21, 2000) on INS?
workload. The LIFE Act extends the eligibility date from Jan. 14, 1998, to
April 30, 2001, for applicants to apply for adjustment of status to legal
permanent residence without returning overseas. INS may revise this goal-
originally proposed in October 2000- later in fiscal year 2001.

Source: INS Office of Production Management.

As shown in figure 2, the number of workyears INS adjudications officers
spent processing adjustment of status applications varied between fiscal
years 1994 and 2000. 16 In fiscal year 2000, INS devoted 240 officer
workyears to processing these applications, more than twice the 116
workyears spent in fiscal year 1994. Adjudications officer time spent
processing adjustment of status applications peaked at 280 workyears in
fiscal year 1997. INS increased its officer workyears by 22 percent in
fiscal year 2000- from 197 workyears in fiscal year 1999 to 240 workyears in
fiscal year 2000.

16 There is not always a direct relationship between the number of INS
officer workyears spent processing adjustment of status applications and the
number of completed applications (see table 4) on a year to year basis. An
INS official told us that the number of officer hours could increase, while
the number of completions could decrease, due to changes in adjustment of
status application processes (e. g., new application requirements and
fingerprinting procedures).

Page 20 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 2: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Applications for Adjustment of
Status (Form I- 485)

Note: Data include adjudications officers? overtime but not the time they
spent on administrative activities (e. g., training or leave). According to
INS officials, data do not always include the time INS officers, such as
inspectors, were detailed to the Adjudications and Naturalization program
because INS did not consistently collect these data.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.

The growth in the backlog of adjustment of status applications was
associated with a growth in the backlog of some other application types. For
adjustment of status applications based on employment, an employer must file
a petition for an alien worker (form I- 140) before the alien files an
adjustment of status application. In addition, a relative may file a
petition for alien relative (form I- 130) at the same time that the alien
applies for adjustment of status (form I- 485). 17 INS officials expect that
as INS reduces the backlog of adjustment of status applications, these
related

17 To apply for adjustment of status to permanent residence, an alien must
have a relative petition for them. If the alien is already physically
present in the United States, then the petition by a relative is filed with
INS. If the alien is overseas, then the petition is filed with the U. S.
consulate.

116 128 197

280 253

197 240

0 50

100 150

200 250

300 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of officer workyears Fiscal year

Page 21 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

application backlogs should also decrease. Figure 3 shows how the backlogs
of these three types of associated applications have changed for fiscal
years 1994 through 2000.

Figure 3: Backlog of Applications Associated With Adjustment of Status
Applications (Form I- 485)

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.

An alien may also submit an application for an employment authorization
document (form I- 765) if the alien wants to work while the adjustment of
status to permanent residence application (form I- 485) is pending, or for a
travel document (form I- 131) if the alien wants to travel outside the U. S.
while the application is pending. Backlogs for these types of applications
have also increased. INS officials told us that the length of time aliens
have to wait for INS to make a decision on their adjustment of status
applications has a direct impact on the number of applications that they
submit for employment authorization documents and travel documents.

0 10

20 30

40 50

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 100

300 500

700 900

1,100

Fiscal year Number of applications (in thousands)

I- 485 application for adjustment of status I- 130 petition for alien
relative I- 140 immigrant petition for alien worker

Page 22 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

This is because employment and travel documents are valid for limited
periods of time. For example, if INS takes more than 24 months to complete
an adjustment of status application, an alien may have to apply for
employment authorization 3 times during the waiting period, since the
employment authorization is only valid for a period of 1 year.

Figure 4: Backlog of Applications for Employment Authorization (Form I- 765)
and Travel Document (Form I- 131)

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

While INS worked on the backlogs for naturalization and adjustment of status
applications, backlogs for other application types increased. For example,
the backlog for application to extend/ change nonimmigrant status (form I-
539) increased 10- fold from 17, 000 pending applications in fiscal year
1994 to over 178,000 in fiscal year 2000. INS officials told us that many
aliens are left in the difficult situation of not hearing from INS regarding
their applications to extend their stays at the time they are

0 50

100 150

200 250

300 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of applications (in thousands)

Fiscal year

I- 765 application for employment authorization document I- 131 application
for travel document

Page 23 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

required to leave the U. S. 18 (For statistical data on several types of
applications, see app. IV.)

For fiscal year 2001, INS established two additional production goals for
applications related to naturalization. INS set production goals of 66,000
for the application for certification of citizenship (form N- 600) and
24,000 for the replacement of naturalization/ citizenship document (form N-
565). INS officials stated that they set these goals as part of their
overall management approach in setting more comprehensive production
management goals. At the end of fiscal year 2000, the N- 600 applications
had a backlog of 85,000 and the N- 565 had a backlog of 29,000.

INS does not know how much time elapses between receiving applications and
the completion of application processing because it does not systematically
record and analyze such data. In lieu of actual processing time, INS uses a
method to estimate processing time, but the usefulness and reliability of
the estimates are limited. INS field offices also estimate the age of
applications that are currently being processed as another indicator of
application processing time, but this can provide misleading information. A
recent INS study revealed that large numbers of naturalization and other
types of applications were still pending more than 21 months after INS
received them.

INS has implemented a policy of minimizing adjustment of status applicants?
wait times for employment benefits. However, each year thousands of
applicants are denied adjustment of status requiring that their employment
authorization be revoked. Because of the lengthy processing times for other
application types, applicants? lives have been disrupted while waiting for
INS to complete processing their applications.

Information on actual processing times is not available because, according
to INS? Immigration Services Division director, 19 the agency?s automated
application data are incomplete and unreliable. The ISD director told us

18 INS officials told us that an alien must file his application to extend
his nonimmigrant status when he is still in a legal status, and generally,
the alien would not have to depart until they heard from INS regarding the
decision on the form I- 539.

19 In this report, we refer to INS? Deputy Executive Associate Commissioner
of the Immigration Services Division as the ISD director. Actual Processing

Times Are Not Known, but Age of Pending Workload Indicates Lengthy Wait
Times for Applicants

Actual Processing Times Not Known

Page 24 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

that although INS? automated systems contain data that could be used to
calculate actual processing times, INS has chosen not to do so because these
data are incomplete and unreliable. In addition, INS? districts lack an
automated case management and tracking system for most applications other
than naturalization, making it impossible to measure processing times in the
districts. 20 The ISD director told us that INS is beginning to examine how
to develop a reporting capability for CLAIMS 3 and that this reporting
capability would include calculating actual processing times for adjustment
of status and other applications processed by the service centers. In
addition, he told us that INS is considering how to use CLAIMS 4 to
calculate actual processing times now that it is almost fully deployed to
all service centers and districts.

In the absence of information on actual processing times, INS has been
estimating processing time by computing the ratio of pending to completed
applications. INS uses the estimates to project future processing time for
incoming applications and to assess its annual performance. However,
fluctuations in INS? workload and problems with the reliability of its data
limit the usefulness of its processing time estimates.

INS has been providing Congress with monthly reports on processing times for
naturalization and adjustment of status applications since 1995. Figure 5
shows INS? estimates of application processing times for fiscal years 1996
through 2000. INS calculated these numbers by dividing the number of
applications pending on the last day of the fiscal year by the average
monthly number of applications completed during the last 3 months of the
fiscal year. Processing time estimates for each of the six field offices
that we visited are presented in appendix V.

20 The problems with INS? automated case management and tracking systems,
the lack of automated systems in the districts, and INS? efforts to improve
its automated systems are discussed in detail in the automation section
beginning on p. 33. INS Estimates Processing

Time, but Usefulness Is Limited

Page 25 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 5: INS? Estimates of Processing Time Based on the Last 3 Months of
Fiscal Years 1996- 2000

Note: INS established processing time performance goals for applications for
naturalization (N- 400) in fiscal years 1999 and 2000, and for adjustment of
status (I- 485) in fiscal year 2000.

Source: GAO analysis of INS data.

For assessing annual performance, INS uses its end- of- fiscal year
estimates of processing time. For example, based on the number of
applications that were pending and completed at the end of fiscal year 2000,
INS estimated that as of September 30, 2000, it was taking 6 months to
process naturalization applications and 17 months to process adjustment of
status applications. Since INS had set processing time goals of 6 months and
24 months, respectively, for processing naturalization and adjustment of
status applications during fiscal year 2000, INS determined that it had met
or exceeded its goals for the year.

4 6 12 26

31 47

17 25

18 8 0 5

10 15

20 25

30 35

40 45

50 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Processing time in months Fiscal year

Annual performance goals set for processing N- 400s and I- 485s N- 400
application for naturalization I- 485 application for adjustment of status

Page 26 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

The usefulness of INS? estimates is limited by two major factors. First, the
estimates of projected processing time fluctuate in relation to the number
of applications INS receives and completes, which in turn is a function of
both available resources and productivity during that time. If any of these
variables change, then INS? prior performance will not accurately predict
its future performance. For example, at the end of September 2000, INS was
estimating that its processing time for naturalization applications was 6
months. By the end of December 2000, however, the estimated processing time
had increased to 13 months. According to an INS official, this occurred
because at the end of fiscal year 2000, INS was dedicating its resources to
meeting its production goal of completing 1.3 million naturalization
applications, and once the goals were met, INS redirected some resources to
processing other types of applications.

Second, the usefulness of INS? processing time estimate is limited by the
lack of reliable data on the number of pending applications. As evidence of
the reliability problems with its data on pending workload, INS had to
revise its projected time for processing naturalization applications as of
the end of fiscal year 1999. INS? inventory of pending naturalization
applications as of September 30, 1999, revealed that the actual number of
pending naturalization cases was about 160,000 higher than the number
reflected in INS? workload data, according to the ISD director. As a result,
INS recalculated the projected processing time to be 12 months as of
September 30, 1999. The original figure had been 9 months.

According to the ISD director, INS recognizes that its method for projecting
processing times does not provide an accurate picture of how long applicants
must wait for INS to process applications, and he would prefer to report
actual processing times. He reiterated that INS is starting to look into
using CLAIMS 3 and CLAIMS 4 to calculate actual processing times.

To reduce the number of customer inquiries and improve service, INS field
offices use another indicator to provide information to the public about how
long they can expect to wait for their applications to be adjudicated.
Specifically, service centers inform applicants of the initial receipt date
of cases that are being reviewed for the first time, while the districts
inform applicants of the age of the cases that are being interviewed for the
first time. This information is conveyed to applicants who visit an INS
field office, or inquire about their case by telephoning the National
Customer Processing Time Indicators

Have Limitations

Page 27 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Service Center (NCSC). 21 In general, the information disseminated by the
field offices and NCSC is understated because cases that are continued for
additional evidence (e. g., because supporting documents are missing) tend
to take longer than cases that are approved or denied when being reviewed
for the first time, and continued cases are not considered when the offices
calculate the age of their pending cases. In addition, the field office?s
determination of the age of its pending cases is not based on a statistical
sample. Therefore, it can only be used as a guide for INS staff to manage
case inquiries.

Officials from the community- based organizations that we contacted
consistently stated that information provided by INS field offices was often
incorrect and misleading. For instance, according to one official, officers
in an INS district had told applicants that, based on the age of their
pending cases, the applicants would receive their alien registration card in
about 90 days in one case and 6 months in another. After 6 months had
passed, the applicants had not received an alien registration card and
returned to the district office, only to be told that it would take another
3 months to process their applications due to backlogs. (App. V contains
information on the age of the cases that the six field offices we visited
reported having processed as of September 2000.)

As part of its servicewide physical inventory of pending applications, INS
conducted a valuation study to determine the dollar value of fees associated
with pending applications that would be reported as deferred revenue in INS?
financial statements. 22 Depending on the date the application was filed,
INS assigned a dollar value to these applications based on whether the
applications were filed before or after the most recent fee change. This
study, therefore, also provides useful information on the age of INS?
pending applications, and how long applicants had been waiting for INS to
process their applications. The study found that for five types of
applications that were pending as of September 30, 2000, an

21 Applicants can call NCSC?s 1- 800 phone line to obtain general processing
time information on particular types of applications. In certain cases, NCSC
staff will refer the case to the responsible district for follow- up and
response.

22 Deferred revenue represents the fees submitted by applicants for benefits
where the applications had not been fully processed by INS. The sample
population consisted of pending applications of five types in 35 INS field
offices that comprised approximately 95 percent of the servicewide pending
applications according to a July 14, 2000, inventory. The study was designed
to enable INS to estimate- within a 5- percent margin of error- the number
of pending applications that had been submitted under the former fee
structure. Recent INS Study Revealed

Long Wait Times for Many Applicants

Page 28 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

estimated 767, 000 applications had been filed at least 21 months
previously. That is, of the approximately 3 million applications pending
among the five types of applications studied, over one- fourth of the
applicants had waited at least 21 month for INS to decide their cases.

Among naturalization applicants whose applications were pending, the study
found that 41 percent, or about 335,000 applicants, had been waiting at
least 21 months for INS to decide their case. In the Los Angeles and New
York districts, 59 percent and 92 percent of naturalization applicants,
respectively, had been waiting at least 21 months for an INS decision. At
the four service centers, the percentage waiting at least 21 months ranged
between 9 percent and 30 percent. Among adjustment of status applicants,
about one- fourth, or slightly over 250,000 applicants, had been waiting at
least 24 months for an INS decision. In the Los Angeles and New York
districts, 39 percent and 48 percent of adjustment of status applicants,
respectively, had been waiting at least 24 months for an INS decision. At
INS? four service centers, the percentage waiting at least 24 months ranged
between 2 percent and 28 percent. Since the cases in the valuation study
were still pending as of September 2000, the total wait time for applicants
will be even longer than revealed by the study. Table 8 provides the results
of the valuation study for the five types of applications sampled. (App. VI
provides the valuation study results for each service center, district, and
region included in INS? study.)

Page 29 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

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

pending a Number

sampled Percentage

submitted before fee

change b Number

submitted before fee

change Minimum

wait time c

Application for naturalization (N- 400) 817,728 7, 634 41 335,268 21 months
Application for adjustment of status (I- 485) 1,000,669 9,670 25 250,167 24
months Application to replace permanent resident card (I- 90)

238,299 1, 527 4 9, 532 24 months Petition for alien relative (I- 130)
789,292 6, 310 18 142,073 24 months Application to extend/ change
nonimmigrant status (I- 539)

102,332 944 1 1, 023 24 months

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

a These are the final numbers of pending applications as of September 30,
2000, as counted during INS? servicewide inventory conducted in October
2000. They differ from the backlog numbers in table 5 because the data in
table 5 reflect the inventory count data adjusted by the INS field offices
to allow for differences in the ways cases were counted for inventory and
workload reporting purposes. For example, the inventory results were
adjusted because they did not include any applications or petitions reopened
on motion or appeal. For inventory purposes, these cases were not counted,
but they are counted for workload purposes. For the I- 539, the difference
was about 76, 000 due in part to the fact that each I- 539 was counted as
one in the inventory. For workload purposes, multiple beneficiaries listed
on one I- 539 form are counted as separate cases. b The fee change for the
application for naturalization took effect on January 15, 1999, while all
the

other application fee changes became effective on October 13, 1998. c The
figures in this column represent the time that elapsed between the effective
date of the new fees

and September 30, 2000. We refer to it as a minimum wait time because the
only information on the age of these applications is that they were filed
before the effective date of the fee change and were still pending on
September 30, 2000.

Source: GAO analysis of INS data.

INS issues employment authorization documents to applicants before it
adjudicates their applications for adjustment of status. INS does this in
accordance with an INS policy that, according to the ISD director, is
intended to prevent aliens from having to wait for INS to adjudicate their
adjustment of status applications before they can work. INS? goal is to
provide employment authorization to adjustment of status applicants as
quickly as possible and no later than 90 days after receipt of the
employment application. 23 Prior to issuing the employment authorization

23 INS generally complies with its own requirement to issue an employment
authorization document within 90 days of receiving an adjustment of status
application. This requirement is included in 8 C. F. R. 274 a. 13. If INS
fails to issue an employment authorization card within 90 days, the
applicant is entitled to be issued an interim authorization valid for up to
240 days to be used until INS issues the employment authorization document
(8 C. F. R. 274 a. 13). INS Grants Work

Authorization to Many Adjustment of Status Applicants Whose Work
Authorization Is Later Revoked

Page 30 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

document, INS is to screen the adjustment of status application for basic
eligibility. If INS accepts the adjustment of status application, the
applicant is granted employment authorization for one year. INS? initial
decision on whether to grant employment authorization to adjustment of
status applicants is based on a brief screening of the application to
determine if the applicant meets basic eligibility requirements. According
to field office officials, this screening consists of an application clerk
checking the application to ensure that it is complete, that an underlying
petition based on a family or business relationship is pending or was
approved by INS, and if needed, that a visa number is available. 24 The
screening does not include criminal background checks. Field officials told
us that application clerks have had some difficulty determining if visa
numbers were available and, in some cases, have accepted applications that
should have been rejected.

INS does not have agencywide quality controls to ensure that the screening
of adjustment of status applications is done properly. INS recently issued
guidance on the screening process for its service centers, but guidance and
training have not been developed for its districts. INS also does not have a
process for monitoring the quality of this screening to ensure that it is
performed consistently and correctly.

In cases where INS denies adjustment of status to applicants, their
employment authorization document is to be automatically revoked. INS field
officials told us that they send letters to denied adjustment of status
applicants informing them that INS is revoking their employment
authorization document and instructing them to return the document to INS.
According to district officials, the districts routinely collect the
employment authorization document at the time of the interview if the case
is denied at that time. This does not occur at service centers because
personal interviews with applicants do not occur at service centers. INS
officials acknowledged that many aliens fail to return the employment
authorization document. INS did not have data on the reasons why adjustment
of status cases were denied, but possible reasons for denials included
fraudulent applications, insufficient evidence, no valid underlying

24 With the exception of asylum applicants, all other applicants for
adjustment of status must be sponsored by a qualifying family member or
employer. The family member or employer is to submit a petition to INS on
behalf of the applicant, and the applicant must receive a visa number from
the Department of State if INS approves the underlying petition. There are
annual limits on the total visa numbers issued.

Page 31 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

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

INS also did not have data on the number of employment authorizations they
revoked after the applicant was denied adjustment of status. In fiscal year
2000, however, INS completed adjudicating 564, 000 adjustment of status
applications and denied about 80,000, or 14 percent, of them. According to
INS officials, INS had most likely granted employment authorization to most
of the denied applicants and this authorization should have been revoked.
Field office officials told us that many of the 80,000 denied applicants may
have received employment benefits for 18 months or more before their
employment authorization was revoked. While waiting for adjustment of status
applications to be decided, aliens could have developed a work history that
may have facilitated their obtaining employment even after INS? efforts to
revoke the work authorization. Although IRCA requires that aliens provide
employers with proper documentation evidencing eligibility to work in the
United States, the Commission on Immigration Reform and GAO, among others,
have issued reports discussing problems with the existing system for
verifying work authorization.

The ISD director told us that employment authorization documents are issued
before adjustment of status applications are adjudicated by INS because it
is important that deserving applicants be allowed to work as soon as
possible. He told us that it is a policy decision that is designed to be
fair to the majority of adjustment of status applicants who are approved by
INS, and it enjoys wide support in the immigration community. He said that
INS has not focused on obtaining custody of revoked employment authorization
documents because of INS? competing priorities. He noted that many of these
documents were close to expiration at the time they were revoked.

Long wait times have reportedly impacted applicants? lives, prompted
lawsuits, increased INS? workload, and taken resources away from application
processing. According to a recent study by the Catholic Legal Immigration
Network, 25 some families have had to endure long separations because of
INS? lengthy processing times and have filed lawsuits in an attempt to
expedite adjudication of their applications. For instance, an

25 Placing Immigrants at Risk: The Impact of Our Laws and Policies on
American Families (Catholic Legal Immigration Network, 2000). Lengthy
Processing Times

Have Negatively Impacted Aliens and INS

Page 32 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

applicant, who was a spouse of an U. S. citizen, filed an application for
permanent residence in 1997. More than 22 months later, INS still had not
decided the case and the applicant?s temporary permit to remain in the
United States had expired. The applicant filed a lawsuit in August 1999 in
an effort to expedite the case. In addition, a class action lawsuit was
filed by the American Immigration Law Foundation 26 and other organizations
in August 2000, alleging that INS is placing thousands of relatives of
permanent residents and U. S. citizens at risk of deportation because it is
not promptly processing applications for voluntary departure and employment
authorization filed under the statutory Family Unity Program. The attorneys
representing the plaintiffs claim that their clients face deportation, lost
jobs, or could not find work because of the long processing delays at INS.
Officials from the community- based organizations we contacted also told us
that the primary complaint they heard from immigrants was that INS took too
long to process applications.

According to an INS official, the long processing times for adjustment of
status cases have produced additional work for INS officers and additional
effort and expense for applicants. This is because applicants may apply for
employment or travel authorization during the time that their adjustment of
status applications are pending. Because INS provides employment
authorization documents that are valid for 1 year, applicants who must wait
for longer periods of time to adjust their status to permanent residence
face the need to renew their employment authorization and must pay another
application processing fee. Applicants who may need to travel outside the
United States while their adjustment of status applications are pending must
apply for travel authorization and pay a fee. If INS had adjudicated
adjustment of status applications in a timely fashion, then applicants would
not have to expend additional time and money renewing their employment
authorization or applying for travel authorization, and INS would not have
additional workload.

According to INS officials, INS has also experienced an increase in public
inquiries on pending cases due to lengthy processing times. INS has had to
shift resources to respond to public inquiries on pending cases at the cost
of processing cases, further increasing the time it takes to process

26 This lawsuit, Escutia v. Reno, was filed in U. S. District Court for the
Central District of California on August 24, 2000. An attorney for the
plaintiffs told us on February 20, 2001, that the parties were engaged in
settlement discussions.

Page 33 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

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

INS officials identified three factors as having negatively affected INS?
ability to improve application processing times and reduce backlogs. The
most significant factor cited was inadequate automation, in general, and
lack of automation in the districts, in particular. The officials also
indicated that a shortage of adjudications staff and fingerprint problems
have caused delays in application processing. However, the most significant
problem- lack of and inadequate automation- will take years to resolve.

Automation problems were cited by both INS field office and headquarters
staff as the number one factor affecting INS? ability to process
applications in a timely manner and reduce backlogs. District offices, which
completed about 45 percent of all applications completed by INS in fiscal
year 2000, process most applications manually because they do not have an
automated case management and tracking system for processing most types of
applications. The key systems that INS has in place for application
processing have limitations and other performance problems that have reduced
their usefulness. INS has taken action to improve the reliability of its
existing automated systems, and it is preparing a business plan and an
information technology strategy to guide its process reengineering and
information technology improvement efforts.

To support its application processing, INS uses three primary automated
systems: the Computer- Linked Application Information Management System 4.0
(CLAIMS 4), the Reengineered Naturalization Applications Casework System
(RNACS), and the Computer- Linked Application Information Management System
3.0 (CLAIMS 3).

 CLAIMS 4, INS? newest and most advanced case management and tracking
system, is the key system for helping process incoming naturalization
applications. INS deployed CLAIMS 4 to the service centers in fiscal year
1998 and subsequently phased it in at the districts. INS intends to add four
Inadequate

Automation, Staff Shortages, and Fingerprint Problems Cited as Impeding
Application Processing

Automation for Processing Applications Has Been Lacking or Inadequate

Multiple Automated Systems Are Used for Case Processing

Page 34 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

naturalization- related applications 27 to CLAIMS 4 by the end of fiscal
year 2002.

 RNACS is used to process naturalization applications that were submitted
to INS before CLAIMS 4 was fully deployed. It is also used to process four
naturalization- related applications. INS officials expect that RNACS will
be completely phased out by the end of fiscal year 2002.

 CLAIMS 3 is used to process applications other than naturalization
applications at the 4 service centers and 2 districts- Baltimore and St.
Paul.

INS has not provided its districts with a servicewide automated case
management and tracking system for the majority of applications they
process. Instead, most applications are processed manually. 28 Because they
lack automated systems for key application types, districts also do not have
a database that could be used for workload management and staff deployment.
District officials told us that they must keep manual tallies of
applications completed, and they cannot determine the number of pending
cases except by subtracting the number of completed cases from the number
received. They said that because they cannot accurately determine the age
and status of their pending workload, it is difficult for them to identify
problem areas or bottlenecks, establish processing priorities among
application types, deploy staff based on workload and backlogs, and ensure
that cases are processed in the order received. They also said that it is
resource- intensive for them to respond to applicants? inquiries on case
status without an automated system. Inquiries require staff to expend time
manually locating and reviewing case files, taking time away from
application processing.

27 The applications that will be transferred from RNACS to CLAIMS 4 include
(1) application for replacement naturalization/ citizenship document (form
N- 565), (2) request for hearing on a decision in naturalization proceedings
(form N- 336), (3) application for certification of citizenship (form N-
600), and (4) application for citizenship on behalf of an adopted child
(form N- 643).

28 Districts have the CLAIMS 4 and RNACS systems to help them process
naturalization and naturalization- related applications. These applications
constituted 47 percent of applications completed by district offices in
fiscal year 2000. The remaining 53 percent of the district application
workload is processed manually, or by using locally developed stand- alone
systems. According to INS officials, many districts use the stand- alone
Buffalo Examinations and Tracking System to support processing of adjustment
of status applications. This system was used in the four districts we
visited to record identification information on the applicant and to print
fingerprint appointment, interview, and other notices to the applicant. This
locally developed system was not used to manage and track cases, provide
statistics on cases completed, or determine the age and status of the
pending workload. Districts Lack Servicewide

Case Management and Tracking System for Processing Most Application Types

Page 35 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

The ISD director acknowledged that this is a major problem for the
districts, particularly with regard to the need for automated support to
process adjustment of status cases. He told us that this issue will be
addressed as part of the business plan and the information technology
strategy being developed by INS. The business plan is being prepared to
guide all INS? application processing reengineering efforts during the next
5 to 10 years. Concurrent with this plan, INS is also preparing an
information technology strategy to guide its automation improvements. A
contract for both these plans was awarded in March 2001. The business plan
and implementation timeline are due by the end of June 2001, and the
information technology strategy and timeline are due by the end of August
2001. Since these plans were still being developed, the details and
estimated implementation costs were not yet available.

INS? CLAIMS 3, the key system used by service centers to support processing
of all applications other than naturalization, is reportedly unreliable and
lacks management reporting capability.

According to INS officials, CLAIMS 3 cannot be relied on because it (1) is
an antiquated system that is frequently nonoperational, and (2) does not
always update and store important case data when INS field offices transfer
data from the local CLAIMS 3 system to INS? mainframe computer. Problems
with the reliability of CLAIMS 3 data on pending cases was cited as a
primary reason why INS undertook a time- consuming and costly 100- percent
physical inventory of all pending applications in September 2000, as
discussed on page 38.

Service center officials told us that CLAIMS 3 is a good tool for individual
case management, but is not a good tool for managing workload because it
does not provide reports to help managers identify problem areas or
bottlenecks, establish processing priorities, ensure that applications are
processed in the order received, and deploy staff. According to the Benefits
Systems Director, a widely known example of a reporting problem with CLAIMS
3 was its inability to accurately count the number of H- lB petitions
approved in fiscal year 1999. As a result, INS exceeded the numerical
limitations set by Congress for H- 1B visas. 29 The ISD director told us
that CLAIMS 3 has not produced management reports since July

29 The H- 1B program allows employers to temporarily fill certain specialty
occupations with foreign workers if employers can ensure that American
workers are not adversely affected in the process. In each of the fiscal
years 1999 and 2000, the maximum number of H- 1B visas that could be granted
was 115, 000. CLAIMS 3 System Has

Reliability Problems and Limited Capability

Page 36 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

1994, when its management reporting function failed and could not be fixed.
He also said that CLAIMS 3 is operating far beyond its design capacity, and
this has led to frequent breakdowns. He said that INS hopes to replace
CLAIMS 3, but will continue to use it for several more years before it will
be replaced. In addition, INS is beginning to examine how to provide
management reporting capability from CLAIMS 3.

INS has launched two efforts to improve the performance of CLAIMS 3. In
fiscal year 2000 INS launched a project to resolve the capacity and
breakdown problems with CLAIMS 3 and improve its reliability by (1)
upgrading service center software and standardizing file servers used for
data storage; and (2) upgrading and standardizing service center technology
infrastructure, such as workstations, high- speed printers, and desktop
printers. INS estimates that these actions will be completed by the end of
fiscal year 2001 at a cost of about $12.4 million. In addition, INS awarded
a contract in January 2001 for an effort to ensure that data are properly
transferred from the CLAIMS 3 local area network in the field offices to the
CLAIMS mainframe, and to develop a methodology for cleaning up the existing
incomplete and unreliable data in CLAIMS 3. This effort is due to be
completed by June 2001 at a cost of $163,500. At that point, the field
offices will be responsible for implementing the methodology and cleaning up
the existing CLAIMS 3 data. No timeframes had yet been established for the
field office cleanup efforts.

CLAIMS 4, INS? case management and tracking system for naturalization cases,
was deployed prematurely as part of INS? response to problems with the
integrity of the naturalization process that surfaced during CUSA. According
to the ISD director, INS began to deploy CLAIMS 4 in October 1997 before it
had met its baseline functional (user) requirements and without sufficient
testing. As a result, INS had to continue developing baseline functionality
for CLAIMS 4 while it was already deployed.

District and service center officials were critical of CLAIMS 4, saying that
it initially hindered productivity. For example, they said that field
offices were not able until June 2000 to correct simple data entry errors in
CLAIMS 4. If field office staff inadvertently keyed in the wrong information
on how a case was decided or whether an individual had attended an oath
ceremony, they would have to submit a request for assistance to a CLAIMS 4
?help desk? at INS headquarters. It sometimes took several months to correct
data entry errors because the help desk had more work than it could handle.
While field offices waited for the data entry errors to be fixed, they could
only proceed with processing the affected cases manually. An ongoing CLAIMS
4 problem cited by service center staff is CLAIMS 4 Deployed

Prematurely and Without Reporting Capability

Page 37 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

that CLAIMS 4 cannot schedule a second fingerprint appointment when
fingerprints are unclassifiable or the FBI fingerprint check results have
expired. Therefore, a scheduling procedure that should be automated must be
handled manually, slowing the process and consuming personnel resources.

The ISD director acknowledged that CLAIMS 4 had many performance problems
when it was first deployed, but emphasized that it has been considerably
improved during the last 3 years. INS estimates that it will have expended
about $41 million to develop, deploy, and maintain CLAIMS 4 from July 1996
through March 31, 2001. Both headquarters and field office officials said
that CLAIMS 4 has now improved to the point where it is aiding, rather than
hampering, production.

In late fiscal year 2000, INS began working with a contractor to develop a
module for CLAIMS 4 that would generate standardized management reports on
the age and status of naturalization cases. According to the Benefits
Systems director, the major obstacle to developing reporting modules is that
using CLAIMS 4 to run reports interferes with its ability to support
application processing. INS is exploring ways to generate CLAIMS 4
management reports without slowing down the system (e. g., by purchasing an
additional server). INS has not yet established a time- frame or cost
estimate for developing and deploying the CLAIMS 4 reporting module.

INS had intended to make CLAIMS 4 its single servicewide automated case
tracking system for all application types. According to the ISD director,
INS remains committed to implementing one automated system and is currently
reviewing how best to do so. He stated that any further investments in INS?
existing or new automated systems for processing applications will occur
after INS completes two agencywide initiatives. Both are being undertaken in
response to our recommendations. In a report issued in August 2000, we
recommended that INS develop an enterprise architecture to help it
effectively and efficiently invest in new and existing information systems.
30 In a report issued in December 2000, we recommended that INS develop a
plan, within 9 months, for

30 Information Technology: INS Needs to Better Manage the Development of Its
Enterprise Architecture (GAO/ AIMD- 00- 212, Aug. 1, 2000). An enterprise
architecture is an information system blueprint that defines in both
business and technology terms the organization?s current and target
operating environments and provides a roadmap for moving between the two.

Page 38 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

implementing an information technology investment management process. 31 We
further stated that there should be no major enhancements of existing
systems until INS implements our recommendations. We recommended that
requests for future appropriations for information technology should be
limited to efforts that are small, represent low technical risk, and support
ongoing operations and maintenance. An INS official estimated that the
enterprise architecture would be developed by the end of December 2001, and
its information technology investment management process would be developed
and provided to the Department of Justice for approval by the end of May
2001.

INS undertook a 100- percent physical inventory (manual count) of all
applications that were pending as of September 30, 2000, because the
automated data systems did not contain sufficiently reliable data for INS to
obtain an unqualified opinion on its fiscal year 1999 financial statements.
This inventory was also needed, according to the ISD director, because
automated data were not available for most applications processed by the
districts. To carry out the inventory, INS suspended most case processing
for 2 to 3 weeks.

As part of its fiscal year 1999 financial audit, INS? financial statement
auditors tested the pending data in CLAIMS 3 and CLAIMS 4 and found that
they were unreliable. According to the financial statement auditors, the
pending data in CLAIMS 3 were unreliable because some data did not upload
from the CLAIMS 3 local area network in the field offices centers to the
CLAIMS mainframe, making INS? database on pending cases incomplete and
inaccurate. The primary reliability problem with the pending data in CLAIMS
4 was that many naturalization cases started by the service centers and
completed by the districts had not been closed out in CLAIMS 4.

Due to the data reliability problems, INS performed a 100- percent physical
inventory of pending cases to try to obtain an unqualified opinion on its

31 Information Technology: INS Needs to Strengthen Its Investment Management
Capability (GAO- 01- 146, Dec. 29, 2000). INS Data Deficiencies Led to

Time- Consuming Inventory of All Pending Applications

Page 39 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

fiscal year 2000 financial statements. 32 According to senior INS officials,
the costs of the fiscal year 2000 inventory were very high in terms of lost
production and staff time because INS had to suspend almost all application
processing for 2 to 3 weeks in order to conduct the inventory. According to
the financial statement auditors, INS will have to continue to conduct a
full 100- percent physical inventory each year until it can obtain reliable
data on pending cases from its automated systems. INS was already planning
to conduct another 100- percent physical inventory at the end of fiscal year
2001.

Despite the doubling of program staff since fiscal year 1995, officials in
INS headquarters and field offices told us that they needed additional staff
to stay current with their application workload. However, they did not know
how many additional staff they needed, where the staff should be located,
and what types of skills the staff should have. The officials told us that
this determination would be difficult because INS does not currently have
standardized workflow processes for most applications and because the
districts have limited automation. They said that field offices have
differing staff needs because their work processes differ. The ISD director
told us that INS is waiting for the development of reengineered procedures
that will standardize the workflow process for each application type before
it develops a staff resource allocation model to determine precise staffing
needs.

Officials from all the field offices we visited cited a need for more
clerical staff, immigration information officers, and computer support
staff. Officials from three of the four field offices also cited the need
for more adjudications officers. They stated that the shortage of clerical
staff and information officers (who could help adjudicate simple cases and
provide a more prompt response to applicants? inquiries about their cases)
leads to inefficient use of adjudications officers. This is because the
higher paid officers must spend more of their time doing such tasks as
searching for

32 For fiscal year 2000, INS? auditors reported that INS was able to perform
an accurate count of pending applications and adequately support the
deferred revenue balance as of September 30, 2000. However, the auditors
were not able to extend the scope of their work to verify the number of
pending applications at the beginning of the fiscal year. As a result, the
auditors qualified their opinion on INS? statements of net cost and changes
in net position and on its combined statements of budgetary resources and
financing for fiscal year 2000. INS did receive an unqualified opinion on
its balance sheet and statement of custodial activity. Staff Shortages Cited
as

Slowing Application Processing, but Staffing Needs Are Unknown

Page 40 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

files and answering routine questions, rather than conducting interviews and
adjudicating applications.

To help overcome staff shortages, INS headquarters and field officials told
us, INS has relied on overtime funds since fiscal year 1994. The amount of
overtime funds increased dramatically from $1.8 million in fiscal year 1994
to $5.5 million in fiscal year 1995, and to $12.9 million in fiscal year
1996. 33 INS officials told us that these increases reflected INS? efforts
to reduce application backlogs. Since fiscal year 1997, INS overtime funds
have stayed between $11 and $17 million. (App. V includes data on overtime
costs for the 6 field offices visited.)

INS headquarters officials expressed the view that field office
Adjudications and Naturalization program staff shortages are due to (1) high
turnover of temporary staff, especially adjudications officers, and (2) an
insufficient number of permanent staff positions. In March 1999, INS
reported that the attrition rate of temporary adjudications officers was
generally more than double that of permanent officers working in the same
districts. For example, in the New York City office, the attrition rate
among temporary officers was 35 percent compared to 16 percent among
permanent officers. In the Los Angeles office, the attrition rate among
temporary officers was 28 percent compared to 9 percent among permanent
officers.

In response, Congress gave INS the authority in fiscal year 1999 to convert
50 percent (300 of 600) of its temporary district adjudications officer
positions to permanent positions. In fiscal year 2001, INS had plans to hire
50 additional contract clerical staff and to redeploy 87 clerical and 103
adjudications officer positions from 8 districts to 14 other districts that
have a greater need based on workload and current staffing.

INS has not performed a systematic analysis of its staffing needs to
determine the number of additional staff needed, where they should be
located, or what type of staff are needed to assist with application
processing. INS headquarters officials told us that this would be difficult
to do because INS? field offices differed in their workflow processes and
their automation capabilities. They said that after INS reengineers its
application processes, INS would develop a staff allocation model to

33 According to INS officials, they do not track the number of overtime
hours worked by officers, clerical, and contractor staffs who use these
overtime funds.

Page 41 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

efficiently distribute the right kind and number of staff to the right
locations.

INS continues to experience processing delays associated with FBI
fingerprint check results, which expire after 15 months. However, INS has
made progress in resolving long- standing problems with the quality and
integrity of its fingerprinting process and missing fingerprints and
fingerprint check results.

The results of fingerprint checks conducted by the FBI to determine if
applicants have criminal backgrounds that make them ineligible for
immigration benefits are valid for 15 months. The expiration of the results
of FBI fingerprint checks continue to cause processing delays at INS because
a large portion of INS? application backlog has been pending for well over a
year. INS? valuation study (discussed on p. 27) found that as of October
2000, about 335,000 naturalization applications and about 250,000 adjustment
of status applications had been pending for at least 21 months. The majority
of these applicants? fingerprint results would have expired because INS?
practice was to fingerprint applicants shortly after the application was
received. Fingerprint result expirations have been particularly problematic
for adjustment of status cases, according to field office and headquarters
officials. This is because the number of adjustment of status cases
completed in fiscal year 1999 decreased as a result of INS? focus on
reducing naturalization backlogs, and the projected processing times grew to
47 months.

If fingerprint check results expire, INS refingerprints the applicant and
submits the fingerprints to the FBI to conduct another criminal background
check for the individual. Field office officials estimated that this adds
about 4 to 8 weeks to case processing time. In addition to delaying case
processing, expired fingerprint check results inconvenience applicants who
must go to an ASC to be fingerprinted a second time and cause INS to incur
the additional costs of retaking the fingerprints and paying the FBI to
analyze them. The fingerprints must be retaken because neither INS nor the
FBI retain them for future use. INS did not have data on the total number of
fingerprint check expirations and the additional funds expended by INS to
refingerprint applicants. However, fingerprint expirations can be costly to
INS. INS estimated that it costs about $48 for INS to take and process
fingerprints. In addition, according to an INS official, INS must pay the
FBI $16 to perform each fingerprint check. Expired Fingerprint

Results Are Problematic, but INS Has Made Progress Resolving Several
Problems With Fingerprinting

Expiration of Fingerprint Check Results Delay Application Processing and
Result in Additional Costs to INS

Page 42 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Although fingerprint costs are included in the fees charged to applicants,
INS bears the cost of refingerprinting aliens if it does not adjudicate the
case within 15 months and the fingerprint results expire. At an estimated
cost of $64 per person, INS may have incurred about $37 million in
additional costs to refingerprint over 585,000 naturalization and adjustment
of status applicants whose applications had been pending for at least 21
months as of October 2000.

INS officials told us that the problem of fingerprint check expirations
lessened in fiscal year 2000 because INS gave adjustment of status cases
priority and field offices did a better job of managing fingerprint
scheduling for adjustment of status cases. Since April 1999, the field
offices have been instructed to better manage the scheduling of
fingerprinting to minimize the number of fingerprint expirations. Field
office officials told us that they have responded by scheduling fingerprint
appointments for adjustment of status applicants closer to the estimated
interview date rather than shortly after the application is received to
avoid fingerprint expirations.

INS has made progress in resolving several problems that it had previously
experienced with fingerprinting. For example, as we recommended in 1994, 34
INS implemented a policy in November 1996 requiring that the agency obtain
the results of FBI fingerprint checks before deciding a case. This policy
helps INS ensure that it does not provide immigration benefits to
individuals who have disqualifying criminal backgrounds. In fiscal year
1997, according to a senior INS official, INS implemented an automated
tracking system to help ensure that fingerprints were sent to and results
received from the FBI. In fiscal year 1998, INS established application
support centers to provide greater control over the fingerprint process. The
quality of fingerprints taken and fingerprint processing times have also
improved.

A problem with missing fingerprints and fingerprint check results that began
in 1997 was resolved by the end of 2000, according to INS officials. The
problem, according to INS officials, was associated with a new system
employed by the FBI involving machine readable data tapes. Under this
system, FBI required its participating agencies to submit both fingerprint
cards and a tape identifying the applicant, and the FBI recorded the

34 INS Fingerprinting of Aliens: Efforts to Ensure Authenticity of Aliens?
Fingerprints (GAO/ GGD- 95- 40, Dec. 22, 1994). Progress Made in Resolving

Problems With Fingerprinting Quality and Missing Fingerprints and
Fingerprint Check Results

Page 43 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

fingerprint check results on the tape and returned it to the agency.
According to INS officials, tapes and fingerprint cards frequently
disappeared or were damaged during shipment or the tapes were missing some
fingerprint check results. INS data indicate that from June 1999 through
March 2000, INS resent 228,356 fingerprints to the FBI because INS had not
received FBI responses for them. In many of these cases, according to a
senior INS official, INS had to take new fingerprints from the applicant
because the fingerprint card could not be found or had already been
destroyed by the FBI, and INS incurred the additional costs of retaking the
fingerprints and paying for the FBI analysis.

Beginning in November 1999, the FBI replaced the tape system with the one
currently in use: the Integrated Automated Fingerprint Information System.
This system involves electronic submission of fingerprints to the FBI and
electronic transmission of the FBI fingerprint results to the requesting
agency. Both field office and headquarters officials indicated that the new
system, based on its performance in fiscal year 2000, seems to have
corrected the problem of missing FBI fingerprint results. Most FBI responses
are received within 24 hours of submission, including electronic rap sheets
on persons identified as having an arrest record. INS? performance measure
for fiscal year 2000 was to reduce the average amount of time between
fingerprinting the alien and receiving the FBI results from 3 weeks to 1
week. With implementation of the new system, the processing time was reduced
to 1 day in the final quarter of fiscal year 2000.

INS is considering exploring whether to electronically store fingerprints,
according to the ISD director. Storage of electronic fingerprints would
avert the need to retake fingerprints should the FBI results expire. Stored
fingerprints would also allow INS to avoid the time and cost of retaking
fingerprints for the same applicant applying for subsequent immigration
benefits, such as adjustment of status applicants who become eligible to
apply for citizenship.

In addition to actions taken by INS in response to specific identified
problems- such as hiring temporary staff to address staff shortages and
changing the point in the application process that fingerprints are taken in
order to reduce the incidence of expired results- INS has taken or is
considering other actions to better manage application processing. These
actions, which we believe are steps in the right direction, include (1)
launching production management initiatives to reduce application backlogs;
(2) establishing a National Records Center to consolidate storage and
expedite retrieval of alien files; and (3) reengineering the Other Actions
Taken

or Planned to Improve Application Processing

Page 44 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

processes used to adjudicate adjustment of status and seven other
applications.

INS created an Office of Production Management 35 to direct and oversee INS?
backlog reduction efforts. The efforts of this office have included guiding
and monitoring the application production activities of field offices,
establishing teams to reduce the processing time of continued cases, and
focusing processing efforts on the oldest pending naturalization- those
filed prior to July 1, 1998.

In fiscal year 1998, INS created the Office of Production Management within
the Immigration Services Division to lead its efforts to reduce
naturalization backlogs. This office was responsible for directing and
monitoring field office backlog reduction efforts, evaluating and directing
resources, providing analytical services, and ensuring that any problems
delaying application processing were identified and resolved. Beginning in
fiscal year 2000, reducing the backlog of adjustment of status applications
was added to its responsibilities.

The Production Management Office initially focused on reducing
naturalization backlogs in the five districts that received the highest
number of naturalization applications- Chicago, Los Angeles, Miami, New York
City, and San Francisco. Each of the five districts was required to develop
a backlog reduction plan. By August 31, 1998, the other 28 districts were
also required to submit backlog reduction plans. For each field office, INS
established an annual production goal for naturalization applications
beginning in fiscal year 1999, and for adjustment of status applications
beginning in fiscal year 2000. INS required each field office to submit a
weekly production report and a monthly production plan for meeting its
goals. A backlog reduction team comprised of representatives from INS
headquarters, service centers, regional offices, and districts, was
responsible for monitoring production efforts in the field offices. INS
officials credit the leadership of the Office of Production Management and
the cooperative efforts of the field offices in helping INS meet its
production goals in fiscal years 1999 and 2000.

A contractor study conducted for INS indicated that about 43 percent of
7,843 naturalization cases surveyed were continued. An applicant?s case

35 Called the Office of Backlog Reduction when it was first created in 1998.
Production Management

Efforts Intended to Reduce Backlogs and Improve Timeliness

Efforts to Reduce Backlogs of Naturalization and Adjustment of Status Cases

Efforts to Reduce Backlogs of Continued Naturalization Cases

Page 45 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

may be continued, rather than approved or denied, for several reasons,
including missing documentation in the case file, 36 failure to appear for
the interview, failure to pass the English or civics test, and expired
fingerprint results. INS did not have data indicating how long it takes to
finish processing applications once they are continued, but an INS official
told us that cases can be continued for long periods of time. This is
because INS adjudicators move on to other applications that may be quicker
to process and, with no data system to inform them whether they are working
on cases in the order in which they were received, they do not get feedback
on the number or age of continued cases.

INS has many pending naturalization cases that were submitted before July
1998. INS reported that, as of August 25, 2000, about 165,000 naturalization
applications submitted before July 1998 were still pending. These cases had
not yet been adjudicated, according to an INS official, because (1) in
fiscal years 1997 and 1998, they were inadvertently dropped in the course of
transferring data from one automated system used by service centers (CLAIMS
3) to another used by district offices (RNACS) and (2) districts focused on
completing new, rather than continued, cases. Since May 2000, INS has
assigned priority to completing these pre- July 1998 cases. INS officials
could not project when these naturalization cases would be completed, but
they said they were monitoring progress and, since August 2000, have
required the field offices to submit biweekly reports on the status of these
cases. As of March 1, 2001, INS reported that there were about 63,000
naturalization cases still pending that were submitted before July 1998.
(See app. V for statistics on the pre- July 1998 naturalization cases for
the four districts we visited.)

To help reduce the backlog of continued cases, INS? Production Management
Office implemented a continuation review team initiative in March 2000. The
team, comprised of adjudications officers and managers from the regions and
districts, was tasked with reviewing and improving district office
procedures for handling continued cases. The team reviewed five districts in
fiscal year 2000, including San Francisco, Atlanta, Harlingen, Houston, and
Los Angeles. These districts were reportedly selected because they had a
relatively large number of continued cases based on their monthly production
plans or were known to have implemented some improvements or best practices
in this area. In

36 A 1998 PricewaterhouseCoopers survey found that the most common missing
documents were alien files, court arrest dispositions, medical/ disability
reports, and tax returns.

Page 46 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

addition, INS wanted to include districts from each of the three INS
regions.

Two of the districts we visited had received continuation team reviews in
fiscal year 2000- Houston in May and Los Angeles in June. According to the
team?s report for Houston, during fiscal year 1999, Houston had focused
primarily on completing new cases rather than continued ones. In fiscal year
2000, however, Houston initiated improvements to its processing of continued
cases. Houston began to focus on its backlog of continued naturalization
cases and set a timeframe of 60 days for adjudications officers to complete
cases continued for additional documentation. The report made no
recommendations for improving the processing of continued cases by the
Houston district.

The team?s report for Los Angeles noted that in fiscal year 1998, Los
Angeles had centralized its more complicated continued cases and formed a
continuation unit at the main district office to complete continued cases.
The report recommended that the Los Angeles district track continued cases
and implement a system at 30-, 60- and 90- day intervals that would call up
continued cases and hold adjudications officers accountable for their
completion.

According to INS officials, the continuation review team is an effective
tool for improving the management of continued cases. They said they plan to
expand the work of the team during fiscal year 2001 to include continued
adjustment of status cases.

A major problem revealed by CUSA was that INS had difficulty locating alien
files and having them available on a timely basis for review by
adjudicators. 37 Many naturalization cases during CUSA were adjudicated
without INS locating and reviewing the alien file, thereby increasing the
likelihood of adjudication errors.

Congress approved the establishment of the INS National Records Center in
October 1998. The creation of the center had been under discussion for
almost 2 decades. The records center opened November 15, 1999, in a leased
underground facility in Lee?s Summit, MO. Before the center opened, INS
stored files at more than 80 field offices. The primary mission

37 The alien file, or administrative file, is INS? hard- copy repository of
information on aliens. INS National Records

Center Established to Expedite Retrieval of Alien Files

Page 47 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

of the record center is to provide timely access to information from alien
files and subsidiary automated data systems by consolidating records in one
location and using state- of- the- art records management technology. INS
expects to transfer all alien files to the center by June 2001, according to
the center?s director.

INS expects application processing time to improve as a result of
centralizing alien files. Having the record center, according to senior INS
officials, will enable INS adjudicators to obtain needed alien files within
a few days, as opposed to the weeks or months that it took under the
decentralized system. Additionally, it will increase the likelihood that the
alien files will be found. The center?s standard for responding to requests
(i. e., locating and shipping the alien file) is 3 days. According to
information provided by the center, the average response time for February
through August 2000 was 2.3 days. As of November 22, 2000, the center had
responded to approximately 370,000 file transfer requests and had located
all but 50 files.

INS is evaluating a study submitted by an INS contractor at the end of
fiscal year 1999 for reengineering adjustment of status and seven other
types of applications. 38 Collectively, the applications included in the
study represented 71 percent of INS? workload in fiscal year 1998. INS
initiated the reengineering effort because it believed that many aspects of
the naturalization reengineering effort could also be applied to other
application processes. In addition, INS had experienced nearly a five- fold
increase in its pending workload between fiscal years 1992 and 1998 for
these eight application types. The reengineering study found that INS lacked
standardized processes, the integrity of INS processes could be
strengthened, and opportunities existed to better utilize technology. With
regard to processes, the study found that applications were not consistently
adjudicated because the procedures used to process applications varied by
office, most field offices allowed their adjudicators to review cases using
minimal guidelines, and standard quality controls were lacking. In addition,
productivity and processing times varied across

38 The study is entitled Immigration Benefits Reengineering Final Draft
Report (PricewaterhouseCoopers, Sept. 30, 1999). The forms included in the
study, in order of volume were (1) I- 765, application for employment
authorization (23%); (2) I- 130, petition for alien relative immigrant visa
(14%); (3) I- 485, application for adjustment of status (10%); (4) I- 131,
application for travel document (9%); (5) I- 129, petition for a
nonimmigrant worker (7%); (6) I- 90, application to replace permanent
resident card (6%); (7) I- 140, immigrant petition for alien worker (1%);
and (8) I- 526, immigrant petition by alien entrepreneur (less than 1%).
Reengineering of

Applications

Page 48 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

field offices, and a lot of time was spent locating and moving alien files.
The technical support priorities of field office staff cited in the study
included the need for enhancing case management and tracking, minimizing
duplicative data entry, and providing information for management reporting
and decision making.

The study recommended implementing new consolidated processes and forms,
quality controls, and a comprehensive fraud- prevention program. It also
recommended creating an electronic alien file to reduce paper file movement
and costs, and a servicewide automated case management and tracking system
for all applications. The ISD director told us that INS is evaluating these
recommendations and will make decisions regarding them after completing two
related strategic plans currently being developed to guide INS? improvement
efforts during the next 5 years- the business strategic plan for
reengineering application processing and the information technology
strategic plan. He estimated that it will take 5 years or more for INS to
develop and implement the reengineered processes and implement a servicewide
automated system to process all types of applications.

INS continues to experience significant problems managing its application
workload despite years of increasing budgets and staff. Notwithstanding
having paid fees to INS for processing their applications, aliens face long
waits for a resolution to their case and have difficulty obtaining accurate
information on how long they can expect to wait. INS acknowledges, and we
agree, that it needs better automation capability and a more streamlined
application process to provide improved levels of service. Automation
improvements, including improvements to the reliability of data in CLAIMS 3
and CLAIMS 4, would provide INS with the management information it needs to
determine how long aliens have been waiting for their applications to be
processed. Automation improvements would also help INS determine whether it
is processing all the applications it receives, working on applications in
the order in which they are received, and providing prompt and correct
responses to applicants? inquiries about the status of their cases.

Although INS believes that additional staff would reduce its application
backlog problem, it is not now in a position to determine the extent to
which staff shortages play a part in this problem. INS does not know how to
maximize the deployment of staff to process applications in a timely fashion
because it lacks a systematically developed staff resource allocation model.
Such a model could help INS determine the right number Conclusions

Page 49 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

and types of staff it needs, efficiently distribute staff to the right
locations, and ensure that resources are deployed commensurate with the
workload to minimize backlogs and processing times.

INS? policy of minimizing wait times by granting work authorization to
aliens before it fully adjudicates their adjustment of status cases has
provided thousands of aliens with the opportunity to work in the United
States. However, many of these aliens were later denied permanent resident
status, and while INS reportedly revoked their employment authorization,
these aliens had already been allowed to work for many months and develop a
work history that may facilitate obtaining future employment. INS could
reduce the need to revoke employment authorization documents by providing
guidance and training on application screening to its district staff and
taking steps to ascertain whether improvements could be made to the
application screening process.

INS? long- standing problems with its fingerprinting process, including
poor- quality fingerprints and ensuring that all fingerprint check results
are obtained, appear to have been largely corrected. Nevertheless, because
over 585,000 applicants had been waiting at least 21 months for their
naturalization and adjustment of status applications to be decided as of
October 2000, fingerprint check expirations continue to be problematic for
pending cases. With digital technology now being used by INS to fingerprint
aliens and transmit the fingerprints electronically to the FBI, there may be
opportunities to store the fingerprints electronically and save the time and
expense associated with the refingerprinting process.

We recommend that the INS Commissioner ensure that INS do the following:

 Develop the capability and begin to calculate and report actual processing
times for applications as soon as reliable automated data are available from
CLAIMS 3 and CLAIMS 4. This includes naturalization applications processed
by service centers and districts and all other applications processed by
service centers.

 Develop guidance and training for districts on how to screen adjustment of
status applications in order to reduce the number of errors made in the
initial review process that is used to determine whether individuals whose
adjustment of status applications are pending should be granted work
authorization.

 Periodically review a sample of denied adjustment of status cases
processed at service centers and districts to determine how many and
Recommendations for

Executive Action

Page 50 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

what types of cases should not have been granted employment authorization
during the screening process. This could provide useful feedback to INS on
how it may improve its guidance and training for conducting the initial
reviews of adjustment of status applications.

 Develop a staffing model for processing naturalization applications and
expand the model to include other application types as their processes are
reengineered and automated.

 Prepare a cost- benefit analysis on the digital storage of fingerprints.
As part of this analysis, INS should calculate the time and cost savings
that would result from eliminating the need to refingerprint applicants
whose fingerprint check results expire. INS should also calculate the costs
that INS or the FBI would incur as a result of storing the fingerprints.

We requested comments on a draft of this report from the Attorney General.
In a letter dated April 20, 2001, which we have reprinted in appendix VII,
the INS Executive Associate Commissioner for Field Operations concurred with
the report and its recommendations.

We have also included in the final report technical comments and suggestions
from INS as appropriate.

As arranged with your office, unless you publicly announce the contents of
this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 30 days after its
issue date. At that time, we will send copies to the Honorable John
Ashcroft, Attorney General; Kevin Rooney, Acting Commissioner, Immigration
and Naturalization Service; and other interested parties. We will also make
copies available to others upon request.

The major contributors to this report are acknowledged in appendix VIII. If
you or your staff have any questions on this report, please call me or Evi
Rezmovic on (202) 512- 8777.

Richard M. Stana Director, Justice Issues Agency Comments

and Our Evaluation

Appendix I: List of INS Applications and Petitions Processed at the Service
Centers, Districts, and Application Support Centers

Page 51 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Form number Type of application or petition a Service

centers b District offices

I- 17 Petition for Approval of School for Attendance by Nonimmigrant
Students X I- 90 Application to Replace Permanent Resident Card X X I- 102
Application for Replacement/ Initial Nonimmigrant Arrival/ Departure Record
X X I- 129 Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker X I- 130 Petition for Alien
Relative X X I- 131 Application for Travel Document X X I- 134 Affidavit of
Support X I- 140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker X I- 191 Application
for Advance Permission to Return to Unrelinquished Domicile X X I- 192
Application for Advance Permission to Enter as Nonimmigrant X X I- 193
Application for Waiver of Passport and/ or Visa X I- 212 Application for
Permission to Reapply for Admission Into the United States After

Deportation or Removal X X I- 246 Application for Stay of Deportation or
Removal X I- 290B Notice of Appeal to the Administrative Appeals Unit X X I-
352 Immigration Bond X I- 360 Petition for Amerasian, Widow( er), or Special
Immigrant X X I- 408 Application to Pay Off or Discharge Alien Crewman X I-
485 Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status c X X I-
526 Immigrant Petition by Alien Entrepreneur X I- 539 Application to Extend/
Change Nonimmigrant Status X X I- 566 Inter- agency Record of Individual
Requesting Change/ Adjustment to or from A or G Status;

or Requesting A, G, or NATO Dependent Employment Authorization X I- 589
Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal X I- 600 Petition to
Classify Orphan as an Immediate Relative X I- 601 Application for Waiver of
Grounds of Excludability X X I- 612 Application for Waiver of the Foreign
Residence Requirement X X I- 643 Health and Human Services Statistical Data
for Refugee/ Asylee Adjusting Status X I- 690 Application for Waiver of
Grounds of Excludability (Under Sections 219 or 245A of the

Immigration and Nationality Act) X X I- 693 Medical Examination of Aliens
Seeking Adjustment of Status X I- 694 Notice of Appeal of Decision (Under
Sections 210 or 245A of the Immigration and

Nationality Act) X X I- 695 Application of Temporary Replacement Card X X I-
698 Application to Adjust Status from Temporary to Permanent Resident (Under
Section 245A

of P. L. 99- 603) X I- 730 Refugee/ Asylee Relative Petition X I- 751
Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence X X I- 765 Application for
Employment Authorization X X I- 817 Application for Voluntary Departure
Under the Family Unity Program X I- 821 Application for Temporary Protected
Status X X I- 824 Application for Action on an Approved Application or
Petition X X I- 829 Petition by Entrepreneur to Remove Conditions X I- 864
Affidavit of Support (Under Section 213 of the Immigration and Nationality
Act) X X

Appendix I: List of INS Applications and Petitions Processed at the Service
Centers, Districts, and Application Support Centers

Appendix I: List of INS Applications and Petitions Processed at the Service
Centers, Districts, and Application Support Centers

Page 52 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Form number Type of application or petition a Service

centers b District offices

I- 881 Application for Suspension of Deportation or Special Rule
Cancellation of Removal (Under Section 203 of P. L. 105- 100 (NACARA)) X N-
300 Application to File Declaration of Intention X N- 336 Request for
Hearing on a Decision in Naturalization Proceedings Under Section 336 of the

Immigration and Nationality Act X N- 400 Application for Naturalization X X
N- 410 Application for Motion for Amendment of Petition X N- 426 Request for
Certification of Military or Naval Service X N- 455 Application for Transfer
of Petition for Naturalization X N- 470 Application to Preserve Residence
for Naturalization Purposes X N- 565 Application for Replacement
Naturalization/ Citizenship Document X X N- 600 Application for
Certification of Citizenship by Parent, or Grandparent (Supplement A) X X N-
643 Application for Certificate of Citizenship on Behalf of an Adopted Child
by Parent, or

Grandparent (Supplement A) X X N- 644 Application for Posthumous Citizenship
X N- 648 Medical Certification for Disability Exceptions X

a Some types of applications and petitions are processed jointly at both the
service centers and district offices. As of June 2000, the responsibility
for processing applications to renew permanent resident cards was
transferred to the application support centers. The districts remain
responsible for processing applications to replace cards that were lost or
stolen, while the service centers process applications to replace cards and
issue initial cards for special agricultural workers. b Some types of
applications and petitions are not processed at all four service centers.
Applications

that are uniquely processed at one or two service centers are also included
in this category. c Referred to as adjustment of status application
throughout the report.

Source: INS.

Appendix II: Description of Major INS Application and Petition Forms

Page 53 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Type of application Description

Application for Naturalization (N- 400)

This form is used by permanent residents18 years old or older to apply to
become a naturalized citizen of the United States. Application to Register
Permanent Residence or Adjust Status (I- 485) a This form is used by a
person who is in the United States to apply to adjust to permanent

resident status or to register for permanent residence. This form is also
used by certain Cuban nationals to request to change the date of lawful
permanent residence in the United States. Application to Replace Permanent
Resident Card (I- 90) This form is used by permanent residents and
conditional residents to apply for

replacement of lost permanent resident cards, or renewal of permanent
resident cards that have expired. Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker (I-
129) Employers use this form to petition on behalf of an alien (certain
nonimmigrant workers)

to enable the alien to come to the United States temporarily to perform
services or labor, or to receive training by the employer. This form is also
used to petition for an extension of stay or change of status. Petition for
Alien Relative (I- 130) A U. S. citizen or lawful permanent resident of the
United States may file this form to

establish the relationship of certain alien relatives who wish to immigrate
to the United States as a permanent resident. Application for Travel
Document (I- 131) This form is used to apply for a: (1) reentry permit, (2)
refugee travel document, or (3)

advance parole document. Permanent or conditional residents apply for
reentry to the United States (if returning from a trip abroad of more than a
year?s duration) without having to obtain a returning resident visa from an
American consulate. Applicants in a refugee or asylee status must obtain a
refugee travel document to return to the United States after temporary
travel abroad. Applicants with a pending adjustment- of- status application
must apply for advance parole if they are seeking to travel abroad
temporarily for emergent personal or bona fide business reasons. In
addition, if a person is outside the United States and must travel to the
United States temporarily for emergent business or personal reasons, he or
she may apply for an advance parole document to be paroled into the United
States on humanitarian grounds if he or she cannot obtain the necessary visa
and any required waiver of excludability. Parole cannot be used to
circumvent normal visa issuing procedures, and it is not a means to bypass
delays in visa issuance. Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (I- 140) This
form is used by an employer to petition for an alien worker to immigrate to
the United

States based on employment. Application to Extend/ Change Nonimmigrant
Status (I- 539) This form is used for a nonimmigrant to apply for an
extension of stay in the United States

or to change to another nonimmigrant status. Petition to Remove the
Conditions on Residence (I- 751) This form is used by a conditional resident
who obtained such status through marriage to

apply to have the conditions removed on his or her resident status.
Application for Employment Authorization (I- 765) This form is used by
certain aliens temporarily in the United States to request an

employment authorization document. The employment authorization document is
valid for 1 year, and applicants must renew it if it expires. a Referred to
as adjustment of status application throughout the report.

Source: INS.

Appendix II: Description of Major INS Application and Petition Forms

Appendix III: INS Naturalization and Adjustment of Status Processing
Flowcharts

Page 54 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

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

Appendix III: INS Naturalization and Adjustment of Status Processing
Flowcharts

Service center processing steps Accepted Data

entered into CLAIMS 4

Fees deposited and receipt sent to applicant

Criminal background checked by FBI Fingerprinting

appointment scheduled

Alien file reviewed and additional evidence requested

Rejected Application and fees returned to applicant

Eligibility checked by application clerk? N- 400

application and fees received at service center

Interview scheduled A

Appendix III: INS Naturalization and Adjustment of Status Processing
Flowcharts

Page 55 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Note: All naturalization applications are initially processed at the service
centers and then transferred to a district for interview and adjudication. a
Supervisory review is performed on any case that may be denied because the
applicant has a

criminal history or a medical disability or the alien file cannot be
located.

Alien file sent from service center to district office

Yes Yes Continued

Reverified by another adjudicator

Oath ceremony scheduled

Case closed out in CLAIMS 4 Applicant

sworn in as citizen

End. Alien file sent to National Records Center for storage

No Is the

N- 400 approvable?

No Is N- 400 approvable?

N- 400 denial notice sent to applicant after supervisory review a

N- 400 denial notice sent

A N- 400 continued

for additional evidence, investigation, or re- examination District office
processing steps

Applicant interviewed and civics and English tests administered

Appendix III: INS Naturalization and Adjustment of Status Processing
Flowcharts

Page 56 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 7: District Application for Adjustment of Status (Form- 485)
Flowchart for Family- Based Applications Accepted Data

entered into local automated systems, if any

Fees deposited and receipt sent to applicant

Name checked by Central Intelligence Agency

Fingerprinting appointment scheduled

Criminal background checked by FBI

Interview scheduled

Accepted (if I- 765 filed a )

Appointment scheduled for employment authorization document (EAD) Rejected

Application and fees returned to applicant

Eligibility checked by application clerk? I- 485

application and fees received at district

Applicant interviewed

EAD adjudicated and issued within 90 days of receiving I- 765 application

A

Appendix III: INS Naturalization and Adjustment of Status Processing
Flowcharts

Page 57 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Note: The districts primarily receive and adjudicate family- based
adjustment of status applications. a Form I- 765 is the Application for
Employment Authorization.

Yes Yes

Alien resident card issued

End. Alien file sent to National Records Center for storage Continued

No I- 485 continued for additional evidence or investigation

No I- 485 denial

notice sent to applicant after supervisory review Is the I- 485

approvable? Is the I- 485 approvable?

I- 485 denial notice sent to applicant after supervisory review A

A

Appendix III: INS Naturalization and Adjustment of Status Processing
Flowcharts

Page 58 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 8: Service Center Application for Adjustment of Status (Form I- 485)
Flowchart for Employment- Based Applications Accepted

Data entered into CLAIMS 3

Fees deposited and receipt sent to applicant

Name checked by Central Intelligence Agency

Fingerprinting appointment scheduled

Applicant interviewed

Appointment scheduled for employment authorization document (EAD) Rejected

Application and fees returned to applicant

Eligibility checked by application clerk? I- 485 application

and fees received at service center

EAD adjudicated and issued within 90 days of receiving I- 765 application

A Accepted (if I- 765 filed a )

Criminal background checked by FBI

Appendix III: INS Naturalization and Adjustment of Status Processing
Flowcharts

Page 59 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Note: The service centers primarily receive and adjudicate employment- based
adjustment of status applications. If the adjudicator determines that an
interview is needed, the case is transferred to a district office for
interview and adjudication. a Form I- 765 is the Application for Employment
Authorization.

A Yes Yes

Alien resident card issued

Case closed out in CLAIMS 3

End. Alien file sent to National Records Center for storage Continued

No I- 485 continued for additional evidence or interview at district office

No I- 485 denial

notice sent to applicant after supervisory review

Is the I- 485 approvable?

Is the I- 485 approvable?

I- 485 denial notice sent to applicant after supervisory review

A

Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major Types of Applications

Page 60 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

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

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Pending + applications received 812,545 1,274,199 1,982,669 2,096,781
2,373,353 2,568,248 1,816,382 Completions 444,074 505,913 1,334,180 713,153
610,547 1,252,420 1,297,986

Note: Workload is the sum of pending applications at the beginning of the
fiscal year plus applications received during the fiscal year.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.

Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major Types of Applications

0 500

1,000 1,500

2,000 2,500

3,000 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of applications (in thousands)

Fiscal year

Pending plus applications received Completions

Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major Types of Applications

Page 61 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 10: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Applications for
Naturalization (Form N- 400)

Note: Data include adjudications officers? overtime, but not the time they
spent on administrative activities (e. g., training or leave). According to
an INS official, data do not always include time INS officers, such as
inspectors, were detailed to the Adjudications and Naturalization program
because INS does not consistently collect these data.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Officer workyears 155 172 400 434 466 660 618 0

100 200

300 400

500 600

700 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of officer workyears Fiscal year

Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major Types of Applications

Page 62 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 11: Application for Adjustment of Status (Form I- 485) Workload
Compared to Completions

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Pending + applications received 442,417 698,786 967,315 1,194,750 1,226,785
1,264,740 1,512,955 Completions 341,759 357,567 541,867 477,974 416,392
299,890 564,131

Note: Workload is the sum of pending applications at the beginning of the
fiscal year plus applications received during the fiscal year.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data. 0

200 400

600 800

1,000 1,200

1,400 1,600

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of applications (in thousands)

Fiscal year

Pending plus applications received Completions

Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major Types of Applications

Page 63 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 12: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Adjustment of Status
Applications (Form I- 485)

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Officer workyears 116 128 197 280 253 197 240 Note: Data include
adjudications officers? overtime, but not the time they spent on
administrative activities (e. g., training or leave). According to an INS
official, data do not always include time INS officers, such as inspectors,
were detailed to the Adjudications and Naturalization program because INS
does not consistently collect these data.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data. 0

50 100

150 200

250 300

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of officer workyears Fiscal year

Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major Types of Applications

Page 64 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 13: Application to Replace Permanent Residence Card (Form I- 90)
Workload Compared to Completions

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Pending + applications received 581,861 661,077 583,0911 1365,553 383,842
527,156 875,485 Completions 442,909 543,171 486,906 260,009 146,441 259,386
718,172

Note: Workload is the sum of pending applications at the beginning of the
fiscal year plus applications received during the fiscal year.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data. 0

200 400

600 800

1,000 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of applications (in thousands)

Fiscal year

Pending plus applications received Completions

Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major Types of Applications

Page 65 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 14: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Applications to Replace
Permanent Residence Card (Form I- 90)

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Officer w orkyears 38 5252 3823 3967 Note: Data include adjudications
officers? overtime, but not the time they spent on administrative activities
(e. g., training or leave). According to an INS official, data do not always
include time INS officers, such as inspectors, were detailed to the
Adjudications and Naturalization program because INS does not consistently
collect these data.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data. 0

10 20

30 40

50 60

70 80

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of officer workyears Fiscal year

Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major Types of Applications

Page 66 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 15: Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker (Form I- 129) Workload Compared
to Completions

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Pending + applications received 309,655 284,507 295,242 327,301 406,675
551,3397 764,236 Completions 318,894 272,817 300,029 327,481 385,493 527,104
698,127

Note: Workload is the sum of pending applications at the beginning of the
fiscal year plus applications received during the fiscal year.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data. 0

100 200

300 400

500 600

700 800

900 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of applications (in thousands)

Fiscal year

Pending plus applications received Completions

Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major Types of Applications

Page 67 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 16: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Petitions for Nonimmigrant
Worker (Form I- 129)

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Officer w orkyears 4247 4651 557782 Note: Data include adjudications
officers? overtime, but not the time they spent on administrative activities
(e. g., training or leave). According to an INS official, data do not always
include time INS officers, such as inspectors, were detailed to the
Adjudications and Naturalization program because INS does not consistently
collect these data.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data. 0

20 40

60 80

100 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of officer workyears Fiscal year

Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major Types of Applications

Page 68 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

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

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Pending + applications received 747,369 811,878 939,389 1,127,798 1,150,032
1,020,319 1,190,768 Completions 619,213 629,163 758,388 763,822 593,315
449,539 383,468

Note: Workload is the sum of pending applications at the beginning of the
fiscal year plus applications received during the fiscal year.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data. 0

200 400

600 800

1,000 1,200

1,400 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of applications (in thousands)

Fiscal year

Pending plus applications received Completions

Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major Types of Applications

Page 69 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 18: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Petitions for Alien Relative
(Form I- 130)

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Officer workyears 102 101 124 138 111 89 78 Note: Data include adjudications
officers? overtime, but not the time they spent on administrative activities
(e. g., training or leave). According to an INS official, data do not always
include time INS officers, such as inspectors, were detailed to the
Adjudications and Naturalization program because INS does not consistently
collect these data.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data. 0

20 40

60 80

100 120

140 160

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of officer workyears Fiscal year

Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major Types of Applications

Page 70 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

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

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Pending + applications received 290,117 310,628 363,613 418,265 531,660
491,856 595,513 Completions 264,454 283,457 330,981 356,458 506,531 398,354
468,451

Note: Workload is the sum of pending applications at the beginning of the
fiscal year plus applications received during the fiscal year.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data. 0

100 200

300 400

500 600

700 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of applications (in thousands)

Fiscal year

Pending plus applications received Completions

Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major Types of Applications

Page 71 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 20: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Applications for Travel
Document (Form I- 131)

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Officer w orkyears 2020 31 40 45 40 42 Note: Data include adjudications
officers? overtime, but not the time they spent on administrative activities
(e. g., training or leave). According to an INS official, data do not always
include time INS officers, such as inspectors, were detailed to the
Adjudications and Naturalization program because INS does not consistently
collect these data.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data. 0

10 20

30 40

50 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of officer workyears Fiscal year

Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major Types of Applications

Page 72 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 21: Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Form I- 140) Workload
Compared to Completions

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Pending + applications received 52,402 58,472 66,803 75,567 75,248 99,188
139,419 Completions 51,568 54,588 63,777 68,865 53,904 59,080 98,457

Note: Workload is the sum of pending applications at the beginning of the
fiscal year plus applications received during the fiscal year.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data. 0

20 40

60 80

100 120

140 160

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of applications (in thousands)

Fiscal year

Pending plus applications received Completions

Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major Types of Applications

Page 73 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 22: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Immigrant Petitions for Alien
Worker (Form I- 140)

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Officer w orkyears 101113 14 1317 22 Note: Data include adjudications
officers? overtime, but not the time they spent on administrative activities
(e. g., training or leave). According to an INS official, data do not always
include time INS officers, such as inspectors, were detailed to the
Adjudications and Naturalization program because INS does not consistently
collect these data.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data. 0

5 10

15 20

25 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of officer workyears Fiscal year

Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major Types of Applications

Page 74 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 23: Petition to Extend/ Change Nonimmigrant Status (Form I- 539)
Workload Compared to Completions

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Pending + applications received 252,330 219,859 244,304 255,860 294,498
455,048 567,807 Completions 249,003 212,485 235,417 233,725 227,355 306,969
383,302

Note: Workload is the sum of pending applications at the beginning of the
fiscal year plus applications received during the fiscal year.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data. 0

100 200

300 400

500 600

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of applications (in thousands)

Fiscal year

Pending plus applications received Completions

Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major Types of Applications

Page 75 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 24: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Petitions to Extend/ Change
Nonimmigrant Status (Form I- 539)

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Officer w orkyears28 21 23 24 24 2124 Note: Data include adjudications
officers? overtime, but not the time they spent on administrative activities
(e. g., training or leave). According to an INS official, data do not always
include time INS officers, such as inspectors, were detailed to the
Adjudications and Naturalization program because INS does not consistently
collect these data.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data. 0

5 10

15 20

25 30

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of officer workyears Fiscal year

Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major Types of Applications

Page 76 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 25: Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence (Form I- 751) Workload
Compared to Completions

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Pending + applications received 127,948 140,651 147,772 130,587 165,423
184,143 187,914 Completions 106,326 107,211 123,190 105,712 95,577 99,039
95,781

Note: Workload is the sum of pending applications at the beginning of the
fiscal year plus applications received during the fiscal year.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data. 0

20 40

60 80

100 120

140 160

180 200

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of applications (in thousands)

Fiscal year

Pending plus applications received Completions

Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major Types of Applications

Page 77 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 26: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Petitions to Remove Conditions
on Residence (Form I- 751)

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Officer workyears 34 33 32 30 27 26 24 Note: Data include adjudications
officers? overtime, but not the time they spent on administrative activities
(e. g., training or leave). According to an INS official, data do not always
include time INS officers, such as inspectors, were detailed to the
Adjudications and Naturalization program because INS does not consistently
collect these data.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data. 0

5 10

15 20

25 30

35 40

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of officer workyears Fiscal year

Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major Types of Applications

Page 78 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 27: Application for Employment Authorization (Form I- 765) Workload
Compared to Completions

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Pending + applications received 767,483 909,126 1,022,937 1,237,354
1,346,866 1,472,042 1,637,419 Completions 680,214 847,040 938,887 1,105,542
1,228,401 1,257,754 1,391,625

Note: Workload is the sum of pending applications at the beginning of the
fiscal year plus applications received during the fiscal year.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data. 0

200 400

600 800

1,000 1,200

1,400 1,600

1,800 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of applications (in thousands)

Fiscal year

Pending plus applications received Completions

Appendix IV: INS Workload Data on Major Types of Applications

Page 79 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Figure 28: Officer Workyears Spent Processing Applications for Employment
Authorization (Form I- 765)

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Officer w orkyears 74 80 8994 9395 97 Note: Data include adjudications
officers? overtime, but not the time they spent on administrative activities
(e. g., training or leave). According to an INS official, data do not always
include time INS officers, such as inspectors, were detailed to the
Adjudications and Naturalization program because INS does not consistently
collect these data.

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data. 0

20 40

60 80

100 120

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Number of officer workyears Fiscal year

Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field Offices Visited

Page 80 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Table 9: California Service Center Applications Received

Fiscal year Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) a 0 0 140,982 226,021 210,924
274,568 136,789 Application for adjustment of status (I- 485) b 918 23 1
20,327 19,298 13,882 26,850 Application to replace permanent resident card
(I- 90) 80,140 62,563 86,846 77,010 81,484 62,845 154,110 Petition for
nonimmigrant worker (I- 129) 67,285 62,394 60,737 62,348 73,165 112,752
167,815 Petition for alien relative (I- 130) 187,709 172,043 171,516 207,868
203,394 124,352 156,258 Application for travel document (I- 131) 0 0 0 3,776
10,128 12,707 23,165 Immigrant petition for alien worker (I- 140) c 11,935
12,206 14,074 16,208 14,370 22,190 25,174 Application to extend/ change
nonimmigrant status (I- 539) 57,081 54,822 58,753 65,152 65,215 167,276
109,146 Petition to remove conditions on residence (I- 751) 23,137 24,178
24,401 20,460 24,771 22,353 21,421 Application for employment authorization
(I- 765) 132,442 178,141 215,451 222,798 216,696 210,999 199,929 All other
applications 19,123 27,340 30,026 55,257 41,105 61,026 59,180

Total 579,770 593,710 802,787 977,225 960,550 1, 084,950 1,079,837

a Service centers did not receive N- 400 applications in fiscal years 1994
and 1995. In fiscal year 1996, some N- 400 applications started to be
directly mailed to service centers for initial processing, then sent to
districts for adjudication. In fiscal years 1996 through 1998, N- 400
applications received by INS were not consistently recorded or processed at
the service centers or districts, according to INS officials. For fiscal
years 1999 and 2000, all naturalization applications were received by the
service centers and then sent to districts for adjudication. b Service
centers did not routinely process I- 485 applications until fiscal year
1997.

c Service centers did not begin to process I- 140 applications until fiscal
year 1997. Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.

Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field Offices Visited

Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field Offices Visited

Page 81 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Applications Completed a Fiscal year Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997
1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) b 0 00 00 00 Application for
adjustment of status (I- 485) c 2,920 163 1 5, 405 12,400 3, 387 15,895
Application to replace permanent resident card (I- 90) 216,511 184,977
140,003 89,637 58,055 68,724 361,384 Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I-
129) 76,316 66,878 67,337 55,800 71,133 114,203 159,469 Petition for alien
relative (I- 130) 196,645 173,191 174,564 196,743 137,373 80,333 97,400
Application for travel document (I- 131) 0 0 0 3,459 7,528 9,224 16,251
Immigrant petition for alien worker (I- 140) d 12,544 13,104 14,573 17,073
9, 951 8,229 26,404 Application to extend/ change nonimmigrant status (I-
539) 57,577 62,513 58,848 60,777 42,421 85,747 102,312 Petition to remove
conditions on residence (I- 751) 21,137 16,988 23,696 16,011 11,566 9, 143
23,535 Application for employment authorization (I- 765) 113,782 176,283
205,274 239,612 198,145 164,224 182,410 All other applications 19,647 27,311
29,275 33,203 26,216 14,506 26,827

Total 717,079 721,408 713,571 717,720 574,788 557,720 1, 011,887

a Completed applications are the sum of approved and denied applications. b
N- 400 applications are completed by the districts. c Service centers did
not routinely process I- 485 applications until fiscal year 1997. d Service
centers did not begin to process I- 140 applications until fiscal year 1997.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.

Production Goals as of April 2000 Fiscal year Type of application 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) a 22,000 Application for adjustment
of status (I- 485) a 18,125

a Production goals were not established for service centers in fiscal year
1999. Source: INS.

Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field Offices Visited

Page 82 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Backlog of Pending Applications at Year End Fiscal year Type of application
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) a 0 0 116,929 230,466 306,892
360,571 123,589 Application for adjustment of status (I- 485) b 168 0 0
15,129 14,580 23,354 21,940 Application to replace permanent resident card
(I- 90) 45,159 55,571 23,211 10,972 34,281 62,725 139,379 Petition for
nonimmigrant worker (I- 129) 1, 272 3,761 4,434 11,652 16,857 17,209 27,554
Petition for alien relative (I- 130) 15,827 37,581 42,125 52,592 118,090
166,217 204,507 Application for travel document( I- 131) 0 0 0 362 3,233
6,446 6,476 Immigrant petition for alien worker (I- 140) c 1,034 2,783 3,597
2,971 7,815 21,987 19,845 Application to extend/ change nonimmigrant status
(I- 539) 5,757 6,079 5,327 9,461 32,567 114,261 120,694 Petition to remove
conditions on residence (I- 751) 143 2,967 748 511 7,704 17,255 15,513
Application for employment authorization (I- 765) 16,959 27,004 34,381
13,482 27,972 69,120 68,529 All other applications 86,319 135,746 230,752
347,598 569,991 859,145 748,026

Total 90,322 143,937 239,904 384,847 605,045 917,662 793,694

a Service centers did not receive N- 400 applications in fiscal years 1994
and 1995. b Service centers did not routinely process I- 485 applications
until fiscal year 1997. c Service centers did not begin to process I- 140
applications until fiscal year 1997.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.

Officer Workyears Spent Processing Applications a Fiscal year Type of
application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) b 0 0 1.3 4. 2 10.7 14.1 16.7
Application for adjustment of status (I- 485) c 2.1 0. 2 0 2. 3 3.2 2. 6 6.0
Application to replace permanent resident card (I- 90) 10.3 17.3 14.3 13.4
6. 3 5.6 19.5 Petition for non- immigrant worker (I- 129) 9. 9 11.6 11.1
13.0 13.0 19.1 16.6 Petition for alien relative (I- 130) 15.7 14.3 19.8 20.3
16.8 9. 8 9.9 Application for travel document (I- 131) 0 0 0 0.5 1. 0 2.6 3.
3 Immigrant petition for alien worker (I- 140) d 5.0 3. 6 4.6 4. 7 4.1 5. 8
9.9 Application to extend/ change nonimmigrant status (I- 539) 6.1 4. 9 5.7
5. 0 5.5 3. 8 4.8 Petition to remove conditions on residence (I- 751) 1.6 1.
7 2.5 1. 4 1.2 0. 7 1.3 Application for employment authorization (I- 765)
6.1 13.6 22.0 20.1 15.6 12.9 13.3 All other applications 12.9 7. 0 14.2 14.3
6. 8 4.6 3. 9

Total 69.6 74.1 95.5 99.4 84.1 81.6 105.1

a Includes adjudications officers? overtime, but not officers?
administrative activities (such as training or leave). Also does not always
include INS officers, such as inspectors, detailed to the Adjudications and
Naturalization program because INS does not collect these data. b Service
centers did not receive N- 400 applications in fiscal years 1994 and 1995.

c Service centers did not routinely process I- 485 applications until fiscal
year 1997. d Service centers did not begin to process I- 140 applications
until fiscal year 1997.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.

Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field Offices Visited

Page 83 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Amount of Funds Spent on Overtime (in dollars)

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Amount expended $171,345 $473,571 $820,381 $755,620 $676,594 $420,891
$1,892,052 Source: INS.

Onboard Adjudications Staff a Fiscal year Type of position 1994 1995 1996
1997 1998 1999 2000

Permanent officer b N/ A 116 106 103 111 108 114 Temporary officer c N/A 00
00 01 Permanent clerical N/ A 107 103 109 5 146 146 Temporary clerical c N/
A 4 0 7 10 7 60 Contractor clerical N/ A N/ A 394 394 516 513 543

Total N/ A 227 605 613 642 774 864

a Staff onboard as of the end of each fiscal year. b Includes adjudications
officers and supervisory adjudications officers. c Includes term (up to 4
years) appointments, rehired annuitants, and temporary (up to 2 years)
appointments. The majority of the temporary officers were assigned to
districts. Source: INS.

Date Applications Being Processed in September 2000 Were Received Type of
application Date received

Application for naturalization (N- 400) a Application for adjustment of
status (I- 485) July 1999 Application to replace permanent resident card (I-
90) August 2000 Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I- 129) September 2000
Petition for alien relative (I- 130) August 2000 Application for travel
document (I- 131) September 2000 Immigrant petition for alien worker (I-
140) July 2000 Application to extend/ change nonimmigrant status (I- 539)
December 1999 Petition to remove conditions on residence (I- 751) February
1999 Application for employment authorization (I- 765) August 2000

a Service centers do not adjudicate naturalization applications. Source:
INS.

Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field Offices Visited

Page 84 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Estimated Processing Time Based on the Last 3 Months of FY 1996- 2000 (in
months) Fiscal year Type of application 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Application
for naturalization (N- 400) a a aa a Application for adjustment of status
(I- 485) 0 b 21 11 173 7

a Naturalization applications are completed at the districts and not at the
service centers. b Service centers did not routinely process I- 485
applications until fiscal year 1997.

Source: GAO analysis of INS data.

Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field Offices Visited

Page 85 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Table 10: Vermont Service Center Applications Received

Fiscal year Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) a 0 0 156,737 211,221 207,752
203,186 145,033 Application for adjustment of status (I- 485) b 11,806
11,969 13,482 41,040 43,428 41,394 46,742 Application to replace permanent
resident card (I- 90) 182,210 141,075 194,054 180,955 158,594 105,623
127,586 Petition for non- immigrant worker (I- 129) 117,241 123,198 97,330
59,760 61,551 59,378 51,536 Petition for alien relative (I- 130) 124,251
150,682 191,500 199,230 201,810 215,476 214,026 Application for travel
document (I- 131) 137,525 112,793 114,234 133,454 164,703 196,855 247,094
Immigrant petition for alien worker (I- 140) c 0 7 18 3,132 7,182 13,705
21,167 Application to extend/ change nonimmigrant status (I- 539)

79,014 58,465 61,226 67,690 74,677 82,742 91,110 Petition to remove
conditions on residence (I- 751) 21,007 21,702 25,421 26,570 27,809 30,119
35,621 Application for employment authorization (I- 765) 33,212 33,944
40,577 32,685 42,666 40,537 40,832

Total 730,027 673,080 916,952 992,781 1, 029,510 1,041,592 1,041,592

a Service centers did not receive N- 400 applications in fiscal years 1994
and 1995. In fiscal year 1996, some N- 400 applications started to be
directly mailed to service centers for initial processing, then sent to
districts for adjudication. In fiscal years 1996 through 1998, N- 400
applications received by INS were not consistently recorded or processed at
the service centers or districts, according to INS officials. For fiscal
years 1999 and 2000, all naturalization applications were received by the
service centers and then sent to districts for adjudication. b The Vermont
Service Center processed only the Baltimore District I- 485 applications
from fiscal

years 1994 through 1996. Service centers did not routinely process I- 485
applications until fiscal year 1997. c Service centers did not begin to
process I- 140 applications until fiscal year 1997.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.

Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field Offices Visited

Page 86 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Applications Completed a Fiscal year Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997
1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) b 000 0 0 0 0 Application for
adjustment of status (I- 485) c 16,139 6, 246 5,815 9,184 15,638 17,243
22,874 Application to replace permanent resident card (I- 90) 135,716
164,965 214,856 212,768 141,775 90,193 50,279 Petition for nonimmigrant
worker (I- 129) 65,081 106,282 177,453 54,845 25,796 63,627 110,698 Petition
for alien relative (I- 130) 127,422 158,050 176,452 188,482 207,714 169,185
198,668 Application for travel document (I- 131) 145,866 107,981 119,072
134,178 147,545 205,200 244,028 Immigrant petition for alien worker (I- 140)
d 0 0 0 2, 466 5,988 11,078 21,588 Application to extend/ change
nonimmigrant status (I- 539)

88,846 54,898 67,635 59,558 63,958 69,561 68,842 Petition to remove
conditions on residence (I- 751) 26,910 25,244 25,622 26,206 20,906 23,581
34,369 Application for employment authorization (I- 765) 23,834 29,071
30,768 28,065 22,496 25,430 17,492 All other applications 629,814 652,737
817,673 715,752 651,816 675,098 768,838

Total 652,779 672,640 841,042 738,691 672,451 696,954 796,940

a Completed applications are the sum of approved and denied applications. b
N- 400 applications are adjudicated by the districts. c Service centers did
not routinely process I- 485 applications until fiscal year 1997. d Service
centers did not begin to process I- 140 applications until fiscal year 1997.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.

Production Goals as of April 2000 Fiscal year Type of application 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) a 22,000 Application for adjustment
of status (I- 485) a 17,125

a Production goals were not established for service centers in fiscal year
1999. Source: INS.

Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field Offices Visited

Page 87 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Backlog of Pending Applications at Year End Fiscal year Type of application
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) a 0 0 100,326 210,540 341,428 288132
160,628 Application for adjustment of status (I- 485) b 2,491 31 19,248
33,398 39,357 45,366 32,882 Application to replace permanent resident card
(I- 90) 81,739 56,184 32,814 29,631 45,045 58,731 147,128 Petition for
nonimmigrant worker (I- 129) 64,887 81,438 267 10,376 47,399 42,960 18,011
Petition for alien relative (I- 130) 13,792 4, 082 13,632 18,384 3, 083
41,087 43,296 Application for travel document (I- 131) 7, 140 11,669 6, 341
5,461 21,949 13,067 25,046 Immigrant petition for alien worker (I- 140) c 0
3 7 273 1,063 3,320 1,477 Application to extend/ change nonimmigrant status
(I- 539) 4,216 7,846 1,491 9,790 20,575 33,776 32,124 Petition to remove
conditions on residence (I- 751) 4,043 86 2 127 6,522 12,739 16,896
Application for employment authorization (I- 765) 12,461 12,435 17,148
20,888 36,504 38,033 41,193 All other applications 5,179 2,910 2,144 9,052
16,148 38,381 10,192

Total 195,948 176,684 174,214 334,193 575,954 621,554 555,071

a Service centers did not receive N- 400 applications in fiscal years 1994
and 1995. b Service centers did not routinely process I- 485 applications
until fiscal year 1997. c Service centers did not begin to process I- 140
applications until fiscal year 1997.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.

Officer Workyears Spent Processing Applications Fiscal year Type of
application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) b 0 0 5.7 0 5.3 1. 7 20.1
Application for adjustment of status (I- 485) c 2.4 1. 6 1.3 2. 5 3.2 4. 2
5.5 Application to replace permanent resident card (I- 90) 7.5 12.0 16.3 6.
7 2.2 6. 4 11.2 Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I- 129) 16.4 12.0 16.3 6.
7 2.2 6. 4 11.2 Petition for alien relative (I- 130) 15.1 18.3 21.1 23.8
12.5 9. 6 5.9 Application for travel document (I- 131) 0 0 0 0.3 0. 4 0.2 0.
3 Immigrant petition for alien worker (I- 140) d 2.9 2. 8 2.5 3. 0 2.9 3. 8
4.8 Application to extend/ change nonimmigrant status (I- 539) 10.0 6. 0 6.2
6. 7 6.9 3. 3 3.8 Petition to remove conditions on residence (I- 751) 2.5 3.
7 3.4 3. 2 1.5 2. 2 1.9 Application for employment authorization (I- 765)
14.6 17.8 17.1 21.4 21.9 21.4 24.2 All other applications 3.0 2. 6 2.4 3. 2
3.6 4. 2 12.8

Total 74.4 76.8 87.3 85.8 76.1 82.9 121.7 a Includes adjudications officers?
overtime, but not officers? administrative activities (such as training or
leave). Also, does not always include INS officers, such as inspectors,
detailed to the Adjudications and Naturalization program because INS does
not collect these data. b Service centers did not receive N- 400
applications in fiscal years 1994 and 1995.

c Service centers did not routinely process I- 485 applications until fiscal
year 1997. d Service centers did not begin to process I- 140 applications
until fiscal year 1997. INS officials told us that officer time in fiscal
years 1994 through 1996 were an anomaly. Source: INS Performance Analysis
System data.

Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field Offices Visited

Page 88 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Amount of Funds Spent on Overtime (in dollars)

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Amount expended $192,780 $422,711 $412,497 $255,725 $484,414 $554,014
$1,518,265 Source: INS.

Onboard Adjudications Staff a Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Type of position

Permanent officer b N/ A 128 133 133 140 153 150 Temporary officer c N/ A0 0
0003 Permanent clerical N/ A 107 108 107 113 141 137 Temporary clerical c N/
A491511 6 8 Contractor clerical N/ A N/ A 295 301 234 462 447

Total N/ A 239 545 556 498 762 745

a Staff onboard as of the end of each fiscal year. b Includes adjudications
officers and supervisory adjudications officers. c Includes term (up to 4
years) appointments, rehired annuitants, and temporary (up to 2 years)
appointments. The majority of the temporary officers were assigned to
districts. Source: INS.

Date Applications Being Processed in September 2000 Were Received Type of
application Date received

Application for naturalization (N- 400) a Application for adjustment of
status (I- 485) August 1999 Application to replace permanent resident card
(I- 90) September 2000 Petition for non- immigrant worker (I- 129) August
2000 Petition for alien relative (I- 90) April 2000 Application for travel
document (I- 131) September 2000 Immigrant petition for alien worker (I-
140) July 2000 Application to extend/ change nonimmigrant status (I- 539)
August 2000 Petition to remove conditions on residence (I- 751) January 2000
Application for employment authorization (I- 765) September 2000

a Service centers do not adjudicate naturalization applications. Source:
INS.

Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field Offices Visited

Page 89 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Estimated Processing Time Based on the Last 3 Months of FY 1996 -2000 (in
months)

Fiscal year Type of application 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) a a a aa Application for adjustment
of status (I- 485) 0 b 10 31 133 15

a N- 400 applications are completed at the districts and not at the service
centers. b Service centers did not routinely process I- 485 applications
until fiscal year 1997.

Source: GAO analysis of INS data.

Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field Offices Visited

Page 90 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Table 11: Chicago District Applications Received

Fiscal year Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) a 21,561 54,258 35,469 5, 183 1,241
0 0 Application for adjustment of status (I- 485) b 13,090 24,951 44,963
42,506 25,476 25,128 16,563 Application to replace permanent resident card
(I- 90) 12,530 7, 954 9,921 7,394 7,456 10,109 31,649 Petition for
nonimmigrant worker (I- 129) c 30 0 3 00 0 Petition for alien relative (I-
130) 4,966 5,077 6,477 10,500 10,134 7, 497 13,480 Application for travel
document (I- 131) 2, 432 2,863 5,426 10,376 13,911 9, 563 7,943 Immigrant
petition for alien worker (I- 140) c 20 2 0 00 0 Application to extend/
change nonimmigrant status (I- 539) 257 173 349 295 166 264 538 Petition to
remove conditions on residence (I- 751) 60 39 47 962 1,672 415 37
Application for employment authorization (I- 765) 15,544 22,146 20,225
34,980 37,486 37,079 32,853 All other applications 7,667 8,794 9,356 15,934
7, 869 8,220 9,244

Total 78,112 126,255 132,235 128,133 105,411 98,275 112,307

a Districts received and completed N- 400 applications in fiscal years 1994
and 1995. In fiscal year 1996, some N- 400 applications started to be
directly mailed to service centers for initial processing, then sent to
districts for adjudication. In fiscal years 1996 through 1998, N- 400
applications received by INS were not consistently recorded or processed at
the service centers or districts, according to INS officials. For fiscal
years 1999 and 2000, all naturalization applications were received by the
service centers and then sent to districts for adjudication. b From fiscal
years 1994 through 1996, most I- 485 applications were received and
processed in the

districts. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, some types of I- 485 applications
were sent directly to service centers for processing. c Districts did not
routinely receive or process these petitions. They were sent to service
centers for

processing. Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.

Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field Offices Visited

Page 91 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Applications Completed a Fiscal year Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997
1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) 22,493 24,803 67,173 43,437 30,234
62,716 70,021 Application for adjustment of status (I- 485) b 16,478 21,178
32,064 31,420 20,801 20,430 20,074 Application to replace permanent resident
card (I- 90) 15 4 7 3,973 6,729 4,348 0 Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I-
129) c 30 0 2 0 0 0 Petition for alien relative (I- 130) 5,098 3,752 6,184
9,227 8,949 7,169 3,388 Application for travel document (I- 131) 2, 367
3,042 5,417 9,917 14,188 9, 446 7,229 Immigrant petition for alien worker
(I- 140) c 20 2 0 0 0 0 Application to extend/ change nonimmigrant status
(I- 539) 207 428 513 1,004 1,065 1,076 1,210 Petition to remove conditions
on residence (I- 751) 2,596 2,810 3,381 2,517 2,231 2,639 1,622 Application
for employment authorization (I- 765) 14,574 20,713 19,578 34,018 37,257
37,524 31,712 All other applications 3,937 4,158 3,869 11,177 5, 907 6,010
11,283

Total 67,770 80,888 138,188 146,692 127,361 151,358 146,539

a Completed applications are the sum of approved and denied applications. b
From fiscal years 1994 through 1996, most I- 485 applications were received
and processed in the districts. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, some types of
I- 485 applications were sent directly to service centers for processing. c
Districts did not routinely receive or process these applications. They were
sent to service centers for processing. Source: INS.

Production Goals Fiscal year Type of application 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) 58,991 62,157 Application for
adjustment of status (I- 485) a 18,954

a INS did not establish production goals for I- 485 applications in fiscal
year 1999. Source: INS.

Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field Offices Visited

Page 92 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Backlog of Pending Applications at Year End Fiscal year Type of application
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) 10,665 40,744 21,576 25,895 26,464
17,071 24,530 Application for adjustment of status (I- 485) a 2,858 6,526
19,248 33,398 39,357 45,366 32,882 Application to replace permanent resident
card (I- 90) 0 0 0 588 517 0 835 Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I- 129) b
0 0 0 0 0026 Petition for alien relative (I- 130) 781 2,352 2,937 2,517
3,348 3,581 13,746 Application for travel document (I- 131) 59 0 0 419 0 22
64 Immigrant petition for alien worker (I- 140) b 1 0 1 0 009 Application t
o e xtend/ change n onimmigrant s tatus ( I- 539) 0 0 3 0 007 Petition to
remove conditions on residence (I- 751) 73 99 99 79 254 581 918 Application
for employment authorization (I- 765) 25 24 255 795 3,885 3,407 3,714 All
other applications 1,594 1,590 1,855 6,012 7,539 10,045 7, 723

Total 16,056 51,335 45,974 69,703 81,364 80,073 84,454

a From fiscal years 1994 through 1996, most I- 485 applications were
received and processed in the districts. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, some
types of I- 485 applications were sent directly to service centers for
processing and adjudication. b Districts did not routinely receive or
process these petitions. They were sent to service centers for

processing. Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.

Officer Workyears Spent Processing Applications a Fiscal year Type of
application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) 9.6 10.9 30.0 37.6 19.9 33.7 39.2
Application for adjustment of status (I- 485) b 6.4 6. 6 13.5 19.1 16.2 9. 4
11.3 Application to replace permanent resident card (I- 90) d d d 1.1 3. 0
1.3 0. 9 Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I- 129) c d 0 0 d 0 0 0 Petition
for alien relative (I- 130) 2.1 1. 9 2.1 4. 0 3.7 4. 5 1.6 Application for
travel document (I- 131) 0. 2 0.2 0. 3 2.9 4. 9 2.6 1. 4 Immigrant petition
for alien worker (I- 140) c d 0 d d 0 0 0 Application to extend/ change
nonimmigrant status (I- 539) 0.1 0. 1 0.1 0. 3 0.2 0. 2 0.2 Petition to
remove conditions on residence (I- 751) 1.1 1. 0 1.1 0. 9 1.1 1. 1 0.7
Application for employment authorization (I- 765) 1.5 1. 5 1.3 0. 7 1.9 2. 3
2.5 All other applications 3.7 3. 0 3.3 6. 5 4.1 4. 3 6.1

Total 24.7 25.2 51.8 73.1 55.0 59.4 63.8

a Includes adjudications officers? overtime, but not officers?
administrative activities (such as training or leave). Also does not include
INS officers, such as inspectors, detailed to the Adjudications and
Naturalization program because INS does not collect these data. b From
fiscal years 1994 through 1996, most I- 485 applications were received and
processed in the

districts. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, some types of I- 485 applications
were sent directly to service centers for processing. c Districts did not
routinely process these petitions. They were sent to service centers for
processing.

d Less than 20 officer hours. Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.

Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field Offices Visited

Page 93 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Amount of Funds Spent on Overtime (in dollars)

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Amount expended $34,125 $106,377 $383,211 $303,269 $350,334 $345,035
$309,778 Source: INS.

Onboard Adjudications Staff a Fiscal year Type of position 1994 1995 1996
1997 1998 1999 2000

Permanent officer b N/ A39484347 62 67 Temporary officer c N/ A 0 38 28 25
33 29 Permanent clerical N/ A 21 22 22 21 21 18 Temporary clerical c N/ A 1
29 24 24 19 20 Contractor clerical N/ A N/ A N/ A N/ A N/ A 14 17

Total N/ A 61 137 117 117 149 151

a Staff onboard as of the end of each fiscal year. b Includes adjudications
officers and supervisory adjudications officers. c Includes term (up to 4
years) appointments, rehired annuitants, and temporary (up to 2 years)
appointments. Source: INS.

Number of Pending Naturalization Cases Submitted Before July 1998 Type of
application As of September 27, 2000 As of December 1, 2000 As of March 1 ,
2001

Application for naturalization (N- 400) 7,653 6,961 4,560 Source: INS.

Age of Cases Being Processed in September 2000 Type of application Months

Application for naturalization (N- 400) 15 Application for adjustment of
status (I- 485) 24 Application for travel document (I- 131) 1 Petition to
classify orphan as an immediate relaitve (I- 600 and I- 600A) a Application
for employment authorization (I- 765) 2 Application for certification of
citizenship (N- 600) 27

Note: Includes cases processed by the district office and does not include
cases processed by the suboffices. a The Chicago District Office does not
process I- 600 petitions.

Source: INS.

Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field Offices Visited

Page 94 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Estimated Processing Time Based on the Last 3 Months of FY1996- 2000 (in
months)

Fiscal year Type of application 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) 2 11 7 3 3 Application for
adjustment of status (I- 485) 5 13 22 25 17

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.

Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field Offices Visited

Page 95 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Table 12: Houston District Applications Received

Fiscal year Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) a 15,523 31,142 30,413 21,350 47,585
0 7 Application for adjustment of status (I- 485) b 8,193 15,564 18,582
23,525 12,052 9, 340 9,713 Application to replace permanent resident card
(I- 90) 1,382 6 557 135 2 34 21,965 Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I-
129) c 4004940 0 1 Petition for alien relative (I- 130) 3,013 4,163 7,099
13,757 5, 978 3,289 4,345 Application for travel document (I- 131) 1, 977
1,365 7,769 18,035 15,571 18,052 15,308 Immigrant petition for alien worker
(I- 140) c 186 27 0 19 3 0 14 Application to extend/ change nonimmigrant
status (I- 539) 540 384 137 209 190 157 75 Petition to remove conditions on
residence (I- 751) 1,050 913 656 716 1,163 759 566 Application for
employment authorization (I- 765) 4,103 2,292 9,240 18,711 21,380 21,323
23,060 All other applications 1,898 1,385 1,567 7,662 5,902 4,925 4,063

Total 37,905 57,241 76,069 104,123 109,826 57,879 79,117

a Districts received and completed N- 400 applications in fiscal years 1994
and 1995. In fiscal year 1996, some N- 400 applications started to be
directly mailed to service centers for initial processing, then sent to
districts for adjudication. In fiscal years 1996 through 1998, N- 400
applications received by INS were not consistently recorded or processed at
the service centers or districts, according to INS officials. For fiscal
years 1999 and 2000, all naturalization applications were received by the
service centers and then sent to districts for adjudication. b From fiscal
years 1994 through 1996, most I- 485 applications were received and
processed in the

districts. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, some types of I- 485 applications
were sent directly to service centers for processing. c Districts did not
routinely receive or process these petitions. They were sent to service
centers for

processing. Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.

Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field Offices Visited

Page 96 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Applications Completed a Fiscal year Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997
1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) 10,243 14,772 32,512 18,372 10,760
33,546 39,202 Application for adjustment of status (I- 485) b 7,578 5,468
11,099 10,875 4, 944 6,533 6,738 Application to replace permanent resident
card (I- 90) 1381 21 557 132 2 16 5 Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I-
129) c 40036 4 00 0 Petition for alien relative (I- 130) 2739 1668 2579 3090
2039 3281 3077 Application for travel document (I- 131) 1956 1362 7766 18034
15532 18077 12696 Immigrant petition for alien worker (I- 140) c 156 27 0 15
21 0 1 Application to extend/ change nonimmigrant status (I- 539) 543 384
144 209 190 157 75 Petition to remove conditions on residence (I- 751) 839
866 962 676 604 747 315 Application for employment authorization (I- 765)
5527 3039 9565 14204 22593 26826 20727 All other applications 1,668 916 703
7,426 5,236 4,900 4,205

Total 32,670 28,523 65,923 73,037 61,921 94,083 87,041

a Completed applications are the sum of approved and denied applications. b
From fiscal years 1994 through 1996, most I- 485 applications were received
and processed in the districts. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, some types of
I- 485 applications were sent directly to service centers for processing. c
Districts did not routinely receive or process these petitions. They were
sent to service centers for

processing. Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.

Production Goals Fiscal year Type of application 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) 29,740 36,726 Application for
adjustment of status (I- 485) a 6,497

a INS did not establish production goals for I- 485 applications in fiscal
year 1999. Source: INS.

Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field Offices Visited

Page 97 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Backlog of Pending Applications at Year End Fiscal year Type of application
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) 8,536 22,807 20,014 24,345 61,770
32,904 19,836 Application for adjustment of status (I- 485) a 2,629 12,724
19,718 32,368 39,498 42,383 43,027 Application to replace permanent resident
card (I- 90) 15 0 0 3 3 5 6,871 Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I- 129) b
0 0 13 13 13 13 2 Petition for alien relative (I- 130) 1,241 3,877 8,188
18,939 23,009 22,995 20,618 Application for travel document (I- 131) 0 3 0 1
40 10 1, 235 Immigrant petition for alien worker (I- 140) b 18 18 18 22 4 4
17 Application to extend/ change nonimmigrant status (I- 539) 7 7 0 0 0 0 4
Petition to remove conditions on residence (I- 751) 408 455 0 85 644 648 201
Application for employment authorization (I- 765) 747 0 0 4,507 3,294 1,791
2,136 All other applications 750 1,059 1,914 2,223 2,893 2,921 2,428

Total 14,351 40,950 49,865 82,506 131,168 103,674 96,375

a From fiscal years 1994 through 1996, most I- 485 applications were
received and processed in the districts. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, some
types of I- 485 applications were sent directly to service centers for
processing. b Districts did not routinely receive or process these
petitions. They were sent to service centers for

processing. Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.

Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field Offices Visited

Page 98 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Officer Workyears Spent Processing Applications a Fiscal year Type of
application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) 4.0 4. 1 5.8 8. 3 7.3 13.6 19.5
Application for adjustment of status (I- 485) b 2.9 2. 1 3.4 4. 2 3.2 2. 5
2.5 Application to replace permanent resident card (I- 90) 0.2 d 0.1 0. 1 d
d 1.6 Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I- 129) c d 0 d dd 0 0 Petition for
alien relative (I- 130) 1.2 0. 7 1.1 1. 4 1.5 1. 9 1.6 Application for
travel document (I- 131) 0. 7 0.5 0. 6 0.9 2. 2 1.5 1. 4 Immigrant petition
for alien worker (I- 140) c 0.1 d dd d 0 d Application to extend/ change
nonimmigrant status (I- 539) 0.1 0. 1 d 0.1 0. 1 0.1 0. 1 Petition to remove
conditions on residence (I- 751) 0.4 0. 3 0.6 0. 4 0.4 0. 4 0.2 Application
for employment authorization (I- 765) 1.4 0. 7 1.0 0. 7 0.5 1. 2 1.5 All
other applications 3.4 2. 4 1.8 1. 6 1.1 1. 0 1.3

Total 14.3 11.0 14.5 17.6 16.5 22.1 29.7

a Includes adjudications officers? overtime, but not officers?
administrative activities (such as training or leave). Also does not always
include INS officers, such as inspectors, detailed to the Adjudications and
Naturalization program because INS does not collect these data. b From
fiscal years 1994 through 1996, most I- 485 applications were received and
processed in the districts. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, some types of I-
485 applications were sent directly to service centers for processing. c
Districts did not routinely receive or process these petitions. They were
sent to service centers for

processing. d Less than 20 officer hours.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.

Amount of Funds Spent on Overtime (in dollars)

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Amount expended $36,172 $139,878 $321,968 $334,670 $311,121 $238,779
$398,565 Source: INS.

Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field Offices Visited

Page 99 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Onboard Adjudications Staff a Fiscal year Type of position 1994 1995 1996
1997 1998 1999 2000

Permanent officer b N/ A28 2828 3637 41 Temporary officer c N/ A 0 7 7 9 15
9 Permanent clerical N/ A 10 10 10 14 15 15 Temporary clerical c N/ A 1 18
12 1 5 4 Contractor clerical N/ A N/ A N/ A N/ A N/ A 8 11

Total N/ A39 6357 6080 80

a Staff onboard as of the end of each fiscal year. b Includes adjudications
officers and supervisory adjudications officers. c Includes term (up to 4
years) appointments, rehired annuitants, and temporary (up to 2 years)
appointments. Source: INS.

Number of Pending Naturalization Cases Submitted Before July 1998 Type of
application As of September 27, 2000 As of December 1, 2000 As of March 1,
2001

Application for naturalization (N- 400) 11,000 5, 023 3,470 Source: INS.

Age of Cases Being Processed in September 2000 Type of application Months

Application for naturalization (N- 400) 14 Application for adjustment of
status (I- 485) 30 Application for travel document (I- 131) 1 Petition to
classify orphan as an immediate relative (I- 600 and I- 600A) 4 Application
for employment authorization (I- 765) 3 Application for certification of
citizenship (N- 600) 12

Source: INS.

Estimated Processing Time Based on the Last 3 Months of FY 1996- 2000 (in
months)

Fiscal year Type of application 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) 4 45 77 7 4 Application for
adjustment of status (I- 485) 26 185 145 93 52

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.

Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field Offices Visited

Page 100 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Table 13: Los Angeles District Applications Received

Fiscal year Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) a 115,055 253,523 125,911 111,169
36,544 63 17 Application for adjustment of status (I- 485) b 30,683 91,394
79,205 76,097 67,329 26,924 48,706 Application to replace permanent resident
card (I- 90) 0 0 0 3, 326 9 34,128 116,988 Petition for nonimmigrant worker
(I- 129) c 00 1 0 0 082 Petition for alien relative (I- 130) 8,037 11,672
11,464 28,421 22,360 7, 706 20,318 Application for travel document (I- 131)
19,025 11,172 26,170 25,324 16,992 25,240 20,711 Immigrant petition for
alien worker (I- 140) c 0 0 78 75 2 0 222 Application to extend/ change
nonimmigrant status (I- 539) 1,292 653 647 91 0 1, 308 2,529 Petition to
remove conditions on residence (I- 751) 25 211 57 888 19 291 690 Application
for employment authorization (I- 765) 35,018 15,461 10,706 72,740 77,015
147,120 144,780 All other applications 8,086 7,382 9,854 18,967 11,172
16,556 17,549

Total 217,221 391,468 264,093 337,098 231,442 259,336 372,592

a Districts received and completed N- 400 applications in fiscal years 1994
and 1995. In fiscal year 1996, some N- 400 applications started to be
directly mailed to service centers for initial processing, then sent to
districts for adjudication. In fiscal years 1996 through 1998, N- 400
applications received by INS were not consistently recorded or processed at
the service centers or districts, according to INS officials. For fiscal
years 1999 and 2000, all naturalization applications were received by the
service centers and then sent to districts for adjudication. b From fiscal
years 1994 through 1996, most I- 485 applications were received and
processed in the

districts. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, some types of I- 485 applications
were sent directly to service centers for processing. c Districts did not
routinely receive or process these petitions. They were sent to service
centers for

processing. Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.

Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field Offices Visited

Page 101 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Applications Completed a Fiscal year Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997
1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) 65,712 91,048 353,585 133,518
109,461 301,318 278,112 Application for adjustment of status (I- 485) b
36,081 40,232 48,492 48,373 52,588 42,713 81,176 Application to replace
permanent resident card (I- 90) 9 1 55 1,653 426 420 1,982 Petition for
nonimmigrant worker (I- 129) c 0 0000073 Petition for alien relative (I-
130) 10,593 11,187 11,533 12,445 15,308 11,740 16,619 Application for travel
document (I- 131) 18,481 10,395 26,460 34,859 33,754 24,806 17,086 Immigrant
petition for alien worker (I- 140) c 0 8 92 65 9 0 11 Application to extend/
change nonimmigrant status (I- 539) 1,033 570 631 672 752 2,015 2,516
Petition to remove conditions on residence (I- 751) 3,346 3,039 3,316 2,079
1,979 2,087 869 Application for employment authorization (I- 765) 33,069
12,149 9, 680 40,914 93,554 147,634 129,912 All other applications 8,133
8,338 8,770 14,131 9, 118 10,818 14,520

Total 176,457 176,967 462,614 288,709 316,949 543,551 542,876

a Completed applications are the sum of approved and denied applications. b
From fiscal years 1994 through 1996, most I- 485 applications were received
and processed in the districts. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, some types of
I- 485 applications were sent directly to service centers for processing. c
Districts did not routinely receive or process these petitions. They were
sent to service centers for processing. Source: INS Performance Analysis
System data.

Production Goals Fiscal year Type of application 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) 258,000 261,542 Application for
adjustment of status (I- 485) a 83,002

a INS did not establish production goals for I- 485 applications in fiscal
year 1999. Source: INS.

Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field Offices Visited

Page 102 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Application Backlog Pending at the End of the Year Fiscal year Type of
application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) 78,972 221,962 21,070 152,473
212,835 74,366 75,706 Application for adjustment of status (I- 485) a 25,611
70,467 98,049 125,727 143,403 122,314 123,800 Application to replace
permanent resident card (I- 90) 1 3 3 4, 157 4,460 4,895 1,750 Petition for
nonimmigrant worker (I- 129) b 00 0 0 0 038 Petition for alien relative (I-
130) 7,411 7,850 9,465 27,156 36,066 32,808 33,130 Application for travel
document (I- 131) 43 535 124 4,346 4,929 5,330 2,848 Immigrant petition for
alien worker (I- 140) b 0 1 24 77 62 62 35 Application to extend/ change
nonimmigrant status (I- 539) 28 10 10 10 12 12 141 Petition to remove
conditions on residence (I- 751) 1,542 1,274 940 490 992 886 2,760
Application for employment authorization (I- 765) 168 31 1,366 48,838 27,821
1, 562 5,685 All other applications 2,802 1,677 2,032 3,891 10,295 14,236
25,556

Total 116,578 303,810 133,083 367,165 440,875 256,471 271,449

a From fiscal years 1994 through 1996, most I- 485 applications were
received and processed in the districts. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, some
types of I- 485 applications were sent directly to service centers for
processing and adjudication. b Districts did not routinely receive or
process these petitions. They were sent to service centers for

processing. Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.

Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field Offices Visited

Page 103 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Officer Workyears Spent Processing Applications a Fiscal year Type of
application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) 18.5 27.0 72.3 61.3 94.0 149.8 112.6
Application for adjustment of status (I- 485) b 11.2 14.3 21.3 63.4 67.1
48.9 39.7 Application to replace permanent resident card (I- 90) d 0 d 0.7
0. 7 9.5 5. 1 Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I- 129) c 0 0. 3 d d 0 00
Petition for alien relative (I- 130) 5.1 5. 9 5.7 7. 6 8.1 5. 2 5.2
Application for travel document (I- 131) 3. 1 1.6 2. 0 2.5 2. 8 2.8 2. 5
Immigrant petition for alien worker (I- 140) c 0 d 0.4 0. 1 d 0 d
Application to extend/ change nonimmigrant status (I- 539) 0.5 0. 2 0.4 0. 5
0.9 0. 8 0.8 Petition to remove conditions on residence (I- 751) 4.0 4. 1
3.2 1. 9 2.0 1. 8 0.8 Application for employment authorization (I- 765) 6.0
1. 0 1.1 1. 5 2.5 5. 0 1.4 All other applications 16.1 14.6 14.0 11.5 5. 7
6.1 8. 7

Total 64.5 68.9 120.4 151.1 183.8 229.8 176.7

a Includes adjudications officers? overtime, but not officers?
administrative activities (such as training or leave). Also does not always
include INS officers, such as inspectors, detailed to the Adjudications and
Naturalization program because INS does not collect these data. b From
fiscal years 1994 through 1996, most I- 485 applications were received and
processed in the

districts. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, some types of I- 485 applications
were sent directly to service centers for processing. c Districts did not
routinely receive or process these petitions. They were sent to service
centers for processing. d Less than 20 officer hours.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.

Amount of Funds Spent on Overtime (in dollars)

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Amount expended $114,767 $724,829 $2,340,033 $1,696,140 $2,219,541
$1,831,409 $2,452,838 Source: INS.

Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field Offices Visited

Page 104 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Onboard Adjudications Staff a Fiscal year Type of position 1994 1995 1996
1997 1998 1999 2000

Permanent officer b N/ A 126 158 170 202 206 234 Temporary officer c N/ A 0
132 108 113 135 95 Permanent clerical N/ A 128 118 122 123 123 118 Temporary
clerical c N/ A 12 121 128 133 129 106 Contractor clerical N/ A N/ A N/ A N/
A N/ A 75 64

Total N/ A 266 529 528 571 668 617

a Staff onboard as of the end of each fiscal year. b Includes adjudications
officers and supervisory adjudications officers. c Includes term (up to 4
years) appointments, rehired annuitants, and temporary (up to 2 years)
appointments. The majority of the temporary officers were assigned to
districts.

Number of Pending Naturalization Cases Submitted Before July 1998 As of
September 27, 2000 As of December 1, 2000 As of March 1, 2001 Application
for naturalization (N- 400) 28,266 26,477 15,280

Source: INS.

Age of Cases Being Processed in September 2000 Type of application Months

Application for naturalization (N- 400) 32 Application for adjustment of
status (I- 485) 36 Application for travel document (I- 131) 2 Petition to
classify orphan as an immediate relative (I- 600 and I- 600A) 14 Application
for employment authorization (I- 765) 3 Application for certification of
citizenship (N- 600) 24

Note: Includes cases processed by the district office and does not include
cases processed by the suboffices.

Source: INS.

Estimated Processing Time Based on the Last 3 Months of FY 1996- 2000 (in
months)

Fiscal year Type of application 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) 0 26 20 2 4 Application for
adjustment of status (I- 485) 18 27 39 45 15

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.

Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field Offices Visited

Page 105 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Table 14: Miami District Applications Received

Fiscal year Type of application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) a 38, 35155, 67566, 16885 0 0 0
Application for adjustment of status (I- 485) b 25,250 45,580 36,036 56,492
33,869 16,273 21,448 Application to replace permanent resident card (I- 90)
8,131 10,761 10,961 4, 807 5,044 5,321 7,314 Petition for nonimmigrant
worker (I- 129) c 4122755 2 0 0 Petition for alien relative (I- 130) 10,267
13,499 16,915 27,838 21,636 11,267 9, 541 Application for travel document
(I- 131) 2, 409 1,672 3,554 7,890 9,324 8,332 9,474 Immigrant petition for
alien worker (I- 140) c 10119916 0 0 0 0 Application to extend/ change
nonimmigrant status (I- 539) 465 778 823 704 471 531 400 Petition to remove
conditions on residence (I- 751) 2,539 2,930 910 227 77 68 51 Application
for employment authorization (I- 765) 44,655 51,219 48,878 61,882 52,599
58,750 68,538 All other applications 2,816 3,768 14,125 8, 251 8,423 13,780
13,227

Total 134,988 186,093 198,413 168,231 131,445 114,322 129,993

a Districts received and completed N- 400 applications in fiscal years 1994
and 1995. In fiscal year 1996, some N- 400 applications started to be
directly mailed to service centers for initial processing, then sent to
districts for adjudication. In fiscal years 1996 through 1998, N- 400
applications received by INS were not consistently recorded or processed at
the service centers or districts, according to INS officials. For fiscal
years 1999 and 2000, all naturalization applications were received by the
service centers and then sent to districts for adjudication. b From fiscal
years 1994 through 1996, most I- 485 applications were received and
processed in the

districts. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, some types of I- 485 applications
were sent directly to service centers for processing. c Districts did not
routinely receive or process these petitions. They were sent to service
centers for

processing. Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.

Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field Offices Visited

Page 106 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Applications Completed Fiscal year Type of application a 1994 1995 1996 1997
1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) 42,195 28,125 159,255 33,515 51,694
142,276 109,166 Application for adjustment of status (I- 485) b 23,080
29,475 44,633 43,302 34,955 20,217 58,795 Application to replace permanent
resident card (I- 90) 103 70 687 154 13 0 13 Petition for nonimmigrant
worker (I- 129) c 00341 3 0 0 Petition for alien relative (I- 130) 9,241
11,063 16,829 22,069 20,512 8, 421 9,351 Application for travel document (I-
131) 2, 056 1,615 3,162 8,583 9,317 7,810 9,541 Immigrant petition for alien
worker (I- 140) c 45198111 0 0 0 Application to extend/ change nonimmigrant
status (I- 539) 434 722 820 750 546 542 334 Petition to remove conditions on
residence (I- 751) 3,930 4,270 5,593 3,937 4,921 4,014 4,373 Application for
employment authorization (I- 765) 45,712 54,397 43,652 63,363 52,811 62,686
71,193 All other applications 2,616 2,251 2,019 8,749 6,983 6,441 12,423

Total 129,412 132,186 276,664 184,464 181,755 252,407 275,189

a Completed applications are the sum of approved and denied applications. b
From fiscal years 1994 through 1996, most I- 485 applications were received
and processed in the districts. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, some types of
I- 485 applications were sent directly to service centers for processing. c
Districts did not routinely receive or process these petitions. They were
sent to service centers for

processing. Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.

Production Goals Fiscal year Type of application 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) 135,594 104,345 Application for
adjustment of status (I- 485) a 59,906

a INS did not establish production goals for I- 485 applications in fiscal
year 1999. Source: INS.

Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field Offices Visited

Page 107 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Backlog of Pending Applications at Year End Fiscal year Type of application
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) 24,543 46,165 36,718 64,353 47,218
6, 882 12,464 Application for adjustment of status (I- 485) a 11,351 15,933
31,628 44,138 43,621 41,777 22,234 Application to replace permanent resident
card (I- 90) 0 0 65 0 0 257 34 Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I- 129) b 0
0 000 0 0 Petition for alien relative (I- 130) 4731 5511 5561 28605 30772
28300 8184 Application for travel document (I- 131) 0 0 278 0 0 0 68
Immigrant petition for alien worker (I- 140) b 0 0 500 0 0 Application to
extend/ change nonimmigrant status (I- 539) 26 44 117 81 41 66 111 Petition
to remove conditions on residence (I- 751) 304 945 0 431 422 792 2036
Application for employment authorization (I- 765) 2621 2414 7197 1618 4479
2496 8484 All other applications 1,834 2,949 7,164 9,754 9,140 15,697 13,437

Total 45,410 73,961 88,733 148,980 135,693 96,267 67,052

a From fiscal years 1994 through 1996, most I- 485 applications were
received and processed in the districts. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, some
types of I- 485 applications were sent directly to service centers for
processing and adjudication. b Districts did not routinely receive or
process these petitions. They were sent to service centers for

processing. Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.

Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field Offices Visited

Page 108 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Officer Workyears Spent Processing Applications a Fiscal year Type of
application 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) 12.8 10.7 40.9 50.6 53.9 73.5 58.3
Application for adjustment of status (I- 485) b 12.3 14.6 23.4 27.0 26.8
15.1 28.6 Application to replace permanent resident card (I- 90) 0.3 0. 5
0.4 0. 1 0.2 0. 2 0.3 Petition for nonimmigrant worker (I- 129) c d 0 d d 0
00 Petition for alien relative (I- 130) 5.2 5. 6 5.9 7. 9 9.2 5. 6 7.0
Application for travel document (I- 131) 0. 8 0.5 0. 5 0.5 0. 6 0.9 1. 4
Immigrant petition for alien worker (I- 140) c 0.1 d dd 0 00 Application to
extend/ change nonimmigrant status (I- 539) 0.3 0. 5 0.6 0. 7 0.4 0. 6 0.4
Petition to remove conditions on residence (I- 751) 2.8 2. 5 2.5 1. 9 2.7 2.
2 2.5 Application for employment authorization (I- 765) 5.7 5. 6 4.2 4. 3
4.2 3. 8 5.4 All other applications 7.1 4. 8 3.9 7. 3 6.6 8. 7 5.3

Total 47.5 45.4 82.3 100.3 104.5 110.5 109.2

a Includes adjudications officers? overtime, but not officers?
administrative activities (such as training or leave). Also does not always
include INS officers, such as inspectors, detailed to the Adjudications and
Naturalization program because INS does not collect these data. b From
fiscal years 1994 through 1996, most I- 485 applications were received and
processed in the

districts. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, some types of I- 485 applications
were sent directly to service centers for processing. c Districts did not
routinely receive or process these petitions. They were sent to service
centers for processing. d Less than 20 officer hours.

Source: INS Performance Analysis System data.

Amount of Funds Spent on Overtime (in dollars)

Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Amount expended $105,950 $412,563 $1,134,627 $828,174 $867,978 $824,688
$1,252,932 Source: INS.

Appendix V: Statistical Profile of INS Field Offices Visited

Page 109 GAO- 01- 488 INS Application Processing Timeliness

Onboard Adjudications Staff a Fiscal year Type of position 1994 1995 1996
1997 1998 1999 2000

Permanent officer b N/ A 86 90 93 101 112 151 Temporary officer c N/ A 0 62
82 62 79 47 Permanent clerical N/ A 49 50 44 53 51 50 Temporary clerical c
N/A 1471 79 4420 20 Contractor clerical N/ A N/ A N/ A N/ A N/ A 44 45

Total N/ A 149 273 298 260 306 313

a Staff onboard as of the end of each fiscal year. b Includes adjudications
officers and supervisory adjudications officers. c Includes term (up to 4
years) appointments, rehired annuitants, and temporary (up to 2 years)
appointments. Source: INS.

Number of Pending Naturalization Cases Submitted Before July 1998 As of
September 27, 2000 As of December 1, 2000 As of March 1, 2001 Application
for naturalization (N- 400) 20,556 10,178 5, 087

Source: INS.

Age of Cases Being Processed in September 2000 Type of application Months

Application for naturalization (N- 400) 18 Application for adjustment of
status (I- 485) 15 Application for travel document (I- 131) 1 Petition to
classify orphan as an immediate relative (I- 600 and I- 600A) 3 Application
for employment authorization (I- 765) 3 Application for certification of
citizenship (N- 600) 18

Note: Includes cases processed at the district office and does not include
cases processed by the suboffices.

Source: INS.

Estimated Processing Time Based on the Last 3 Months of FY 1996- 2000 (in
months)

Fiscal year Type of application 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Application for naturalization (N- 400) 2 25 6 0 1 Application for
adjustment of status (I- 485) 8 12 21 42 3

Source: GAO analysis of INS Performance Analysis System data.

Appendix VI: INS Valuation Study Results on Pending Application Wait Times
for Selected Field Offices

Page 110 GAO- 01- 488 Factors Impeding Timeliness of Processing

Table 15: Valuation Study Results on Wait Times for Naturalization
Applications (Form N- 400) Application Field office Number

pending Number sampled Percentage submitted

before fee change a Estimated applicants waiting at least 21 months b

Service center

California 122,857 666 30 36,857 Nebraska 59,162 843 9 5, 325 Texas 89,213
842 22 19,627 Vermont 172,159 1630 14 24,102

District

Los Angeles 75,628 1052 59 44,621 New York 40,418 538 92 37,185

Region

Central 78,506 546 64 50,244 Eastern 103,301 700 58 59,915 Western 76,484
817 68 52,009

Note: Results as of September 30, 2000. a Fee change was January 15, 1999.

b The sampled population consists of 5 types of pending applications in 35
INS field offices that comprise approximately 95- percent of the servicewide
pending applications according to a July 14, 2000, inventory. INS designed
each sample so that the margin of error for each estimate is within 5
percent at the 95- percent confidence level.

Source: INS.

Appendix VI: INS Valuation Study Results on Pending Application Wait Times
for Selected Field Offices

Appendix VI: INS Valuation Study Results on Pending Application Wait Times
for Selected Field Offices

Page 111 GAO- 01- 488 Factors Impeding Timeliness of Processing

Table 16: Valuation Study Results on Wait Times for Application for
Adjustment of Status (Form I- 485) Application Field office Number

pending Number sampled Percentage submitted

before fee change a Estimated applicants waiting at least 21 months b

Service center

California 21,940 154 14 3,072 Nebraska 199,958 2, 598 2 3, 999 Texas 89,979
512 28 25,194 Vermont 59,080 563 6 3, 545

District

Los Angeles 123,815 1, 544 39 48,288 New York 81,017 720 48 38,888

Region

Central 161,754 1, 278 35 56,614 Eastern 141,904 1, 059 34 48,247 Western
121,222 1, 242 33 40,003

Note: Results as of September 30, 2000. a Fee change was October 13, 1998.

b The sampled population consists of 5 types of pending applications in 35
INS field offices that comprise approximately 95- percent of the servicewide
pending applications according to a July 14, 2000, inventory. INS designed
each sample so that the margin of error for each estimate is within 5
percent at the 95- percent confidence level.

Source: INS.

Table 17: Valuation Study Results on Wait Times for Application to Replace
Permanent Resident Card (Form I- 90) Application Field office Number

pending Number sampled

Percentage before fee change a

Estimated applicants waiting at least 21 months b Service center

California 138,832 741 0 0 Nebraska 40,812 341 0 0 Texas 15,649 224 22 3,443
Vermont 17,729 221 3 532

Note: Results as of September 30, 2000. a Fee change was October 13, 1998.

b INS designed each sample so that the margin of error for each estimate is
within 5 percent at the 95- percent confidence level. INS sampled the
application to replace alien registration card at the four service centers
only. Because INS did not sample pending applications in the districts, the
number of pending applications will be smaller than the number of pending
applications in table 8.

Source: INS.

Appendix VI: INS Valuation Study Results on Pending Application Wait Times
for Selected Field Offices

Page 112 GAO- 01- 488 Factors Impeding Timeliness of Processing

Table 18: Valuation Study Results on Wait Times for Petition for Alien
Relative (Form I- 130) Application Field office Number

pending Number sampled Percentage submitted

before fee change a Estimated applicants waiting at least 21 months b

Service center California 202,313 589 28 56,648 Nebraska 62,376 921 0 0
Texas 122,848 1, 037 6 7, 371 Vermont 145,983 1, 429 7 10,219

District

Los Angeles 33,140 509 28 9,279 New York 41,721 434 46 19,192

Region

Central 69,961 515 38 26,585 Eastern 67,257 449 29 19,505 Western 43,693 427
36 15,729

Note: Results as of September 30, 2000. a Fee change was October 13, 1998.

b The sampled population consists of 5 types of pending applications in 35
INS field offices that comprise approximately 95 percent of the servicewide
pending applications according to a July 14, 2000, inventory. INS designed
each sample so that the margin of error for each estimate is within 5
percent at the 95- percent confidence level.

Table 19: Valuation Study Results on Wait Time for Application to Extend/
Change Nonimmigrant Status (Form I- 539) Application Field office Number

pending Number sampled

Percentage before fee change a

Estimated applicants waiting at least 21 months b Service center

California 45,105 249 4 1, 804 Nebraska 8,485 234 0 0 Texas 15,214 190 0 0
Vermont 32,124 271 0 0

Note: Results as of September 30, 2000. a Fee change was October 13, 1998.

b INS designed each sample so that the margin of error for each estimate is
within 5 percent at the 95- percent confidence level. INS sampled the
application to extend/ change nonimmigrant status (Form I539) at the 4
service centers only. Because INS did not sample pending applications in the
districts, the number of pending applications will be smaller than the
number of pending applications in table 8.

Source: INS.

Appendix VII: Comments From the Department of Justice Page 113 GAO- 01- 488
Factors Impeding Timeliness of Processing

Appendix VII: Comments From the Department of Justice

Appendix VIII: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments Page 114 GAO- 01- 488
Factors Impeding Timeliness of Processing

Richard M. Stana (202) 512- 8777 Evi L. Rezmovic (202) 512- 8777

In addition to the above, Gretchen Bornhop, Nancy Kawahara, Jennifer Kim,
David Alexander, Ann H. Finley, and Jennifer Bryning made key contributions
to this report. Appendix VIII: GAO Contacts and Staff

Acknowledgments GAO Contacts Acknowledgments

(183640)

The first copy of each GAO report is free. Additional copies of reports are
$2 each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of
Documents. VISA and MasterCard credit cards are also accepted.

Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a single address are
discounted 25 percent.

Orders by mail:

U. S. General Accounting Office P. O. Box 37050 Washington, DC 20013

Orders by visiting:

Room 1100 700 4 th St., NW (corner of 4 th and G Sts. NW) Washington, DC
20013

Orders by phone:

(202) 512- 6000 fax: (202) 512- 6061 TDD (202) 512- 2537

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and testimony. To
receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any list from the past 30
days, please call (202) 512- 6000 using a touchtone phone. A recorded menu
will provide information on how to obtain these lists.

Orders by Internet

For information on how to access GAO reports on the Internet, send an email
message with ?info? in the body to:

Info@ www. gao. gov or visit GAO?s World Wide Web home page at: http:// www.
gao. gov

Contact one:

 Web site: http:// www. gao. gov/ fraudnet/ fraudnet. htm

 E- mail: fraudnet@ gao. gov

 1- 800- 424- 5454 (automated answering system) Ordering Information

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs
*** End of document. ***