Homeland Security: Performance of Foreign Student and Exchange
Visitor Information System Continues to Improve, But Issues
Remain (17-MAR-05, GAO-05-440T).
The Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS) is an
Internet-based system run by the Department of Homeland Security
(DHS) to collect and record information on foreign students,
exchange visitors, and their dependents--before they enter the
United States, when they enter, and during their stay. GAO has
reported (GAO-04-690) that although the system had a number of
performance problems during the first year that its use was
required, several SEVIS performance indicators were positive at
that time (June 2004). Nonetheless, some problems were still
being reported by educational organizations. In addition,
concerns have been raised that the number of international
students and exchange visitors coming to the United States has
been negatively affected by the U.S. visa process. Accordingly,
the Congress asked GAO to testify on its work on SEVIS and
related issues. This testimony is based on its June 2004 report,
augmented by more recent GAO work, reports that we issued in
February 2004 and 2005 on student and visiting scholar visa
processing, and related recent research by others.
-------------------------Indexing Terms-------------------------
REPORTNUM: GAO-05-440T
ACCNO: A19677
TITLE: Homeland Security: Performance of Foreign Student and
Exchange Visitor Information System Continues to Improve, But
Issues Remain
DATE: 03/17/2005
SUBJECT: Cultural exchange programs
Data collection
Exchange of persons programs
F-1 Visas
Foreign students
J-1 Visas
Performance measures
Program evaluation
Program management
Strategic planning
Homeland security
INS Student Exchange Visitor Information
System
******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a **
** GAO Product. **
** **
** 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-05-440T
United States Government Accountability Office
GAO Testimony Before Congressional Subcommittees
For Release on Delivery Expected at 10:00 a.m., EST Thursday, March 17,
2005
HOMELAND SECURITY
Performance of Foreign Student and Exchange Visitor Information System Continues
to Improve, but Issues Remain
Joint Statement of Randolph C. Hite, Director Information Technology
Architecture and Systems Issues, and Jess T. Ford, Director, International
Affairs and Trade
GAO-05-440T
[IMG]
March 17, 2005
HOMELAND SECURITY
Performance of Foreign Student and Exchange Visitor Information System Continues
to Improve, but Issues Remain
What GAO Found
Indications are that SEVIS performance has improved and continues to
improve. In June 2004, GAO reported improvement based on several
indicators, including reports showing that certain key system performance
requirements were being met, trends showing a decline in new requests for
system corrections, and the views of officials representing 10 educational
organizations. DHS attributed this performance improvement to a number of
actions, such as installation of a series of new software releases and
increased Help Desk staffing and training.
However, GAO also reported that several key system performance
requirements were not being formally measured, so that DHS might not be
able to identify serious system problems in time to address them before
they could affect the successful accomplishment of SEVIS objectives.
Further, some educational organizations were still experiencing problems,
particularly with regard to Help Desk support. GAO also reported that
educational organizations were concerned about proposed options for
collecting SEVIS fees. Accordingly, it made recommendations aimed at
improving system performance measurement and resolving educational
organizations' Help Desk and fee concerns.
Since June 2004, DHS reports that it has taken steps to address GAO
recommendations, and in particular it has taken a number of actions to
strengthen Help Desk support. Moreover, educational organizations
generally agree that SEVIS performance has continued to improve, and that
their past fee collection concerns have been alleviated. However, these
educational organizations still cite residual Help Desk problems, which
they believe create hardships for students and exchange visitors. Most of
these organizations, however, do not believe that SEVIS is the reason for
the declining number of international students and exchange visitors
coming to the United States.
These declining numbers were cited in a recent report by the Council of
Graduate Schools, which describes declines in foreign graduate student
applications, admissions, and enrollments between 2003 and 2004, and
further declines in these applications between 2004 and 2005. The report
attributes the decline to increased global competition and changed visa
policies. In this regard, GAO recently reported on the State Department's
efforts to address its prior recommendations for improving the Visas
Mantis program (under which interagency security checks are performed to
identify applicants who may pose a threat to national security by
illegally transferring sensitive technology). According to this report, a
combination of federal agency steps resulted in a significant decline in
Visas Mantis processing times and in the number of cases pending more than
60 days. The Council of Graduate Schools' report also recognizes the
recent Visas Mantis program changes as positive steps.
United States Government Accountability Office
Messrs. Chairmen and Members of the Subcommittees:
We appreciate the opportunity to participate in the Subcommittees' hearing
on the federal government's progress in tracking international students in
higher education. As you know, a central component of this tracking is the
Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS), an Internet-based
system run by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to collect and
record information on foreign students, exchange visitors, and their
dependents-before they enter the United States, when they enter, and
during their stay. The system, which is the focus of our testimony, began
operating in July 2002, and DHS required its use for all new and
continuing foreign students and exchange visitors beginning in August
2003.
SEVIS automates the manual, paper-intensive processes that schools and
exchange programs had been using to manage and report information about
foreign students and exchange visitors. With SEVIS, schools and program
sponsors can transmit information electronically to DHS and the Department
of State. The system's two main objectives are
0M to support the oversight and enforcement of laws and regulations
concerning foreign students, exchange visitors, and schools, as well as
sponsors of exchange visitor programs who are authorized by the government
to issue eligibility documents, and
0M to improve DHS's processing of foreign students and exchange visitors
at ports of entry, through streamlined procedures and modernized data
capture.
Our testimony today is based on a report that we issued in June 20041 on
SEVIS performance, augmented by our recent work to determine DHS efforts
to strengthen system performance since that report, reports that we issued
in February 2004 and 2005 on student
1 GAO, Homeland Security: Performance of Information System to Monitor
Foreign Students and Exchange Visitors Has Improved, but Issues Remain,
GAO-04-690 (Washington, D.C.: June 18, 2004).
and visiting scholar visa processing,2 and related recent research by
others.
All work related to our testimony was conducted in accordance with
generally accepted government auditing standards. Our SEVIS work was
performed at DHS and State headquarters in Washington, D.C., and at 10
educational organizations,3 from December 2003 through March 2004; we also
conducted follow-up work at DHS Headquarters and 6 of the 10 educational
organizations in March 2005.4 Our work on student and visiting scholar
visa processing was performed from May 2003 through January 2004, and July
2004 through February 2005 at several locations: DHS, State, and Federal
Bureau of Investigation (FBI) headquarters in Washington, D.C.; and U.S.
embassies and consulates in China, India, Russia, and Ukraine.
Results in Brief
After a number of problems during the first year that its use was
required, SEVIS performance improved. As we reported last year, a number
of indicators of how well SEVIS was performing were positive. In
particular, DHS reports relating to certain system
2 GAO, Border Security: Improvements Needed to Reduce Time Taken to
Adjudicate Visas for Science Students and Scholars, GAO-04-371,
(Washington, D.C.: Feb. 25, 2004) and GAO, Border Security: Streamlined
Visas Mantis Program Has Lowered Burden on Foreign Science Students and
Scholars, but Further Refinements Needed, GAO-05-198 (Washington, D.C.:
Feb. 18, 2005).
3The 10 organizations were the Accrediting Council for Continuing
Education and Training, Alliance for International Educational and
Cultural Exchange, American Association of Collegiate Registrars, American
Association of Community Colleges, American Council of Education,
Association of American Universities, Association of International
Educators, Council for Standards for International Educational Travel,
Council of International Educational Exchange, and the National
Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges.
4 The six organizations were the Accrediting Council for Continuing
Education and Training, American Association of Community Colleges,
Association of American Universities, Association of International
Educators, Council of International Educational Exchange, and the National
Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges.
performance requirements5 showed that some key requirements were being
met. Also, our analysis of new system change requests6 during the first
year of required use, the majority of which related to fixing system
problems, showed that the number of new requests was steadily declining.
Further, the consensus among officials representing 10 educational
organizations that we spoke to was that system performance had improved.
At that time, DHS attributed this performance improvement to a number of
actions, such as installation of a series of new software releases and
increased Help Desk staffing and training.
However, we also reported that several key system performance requirements
were not being formally measured, and that by not measuring them, DHS was
not adequately positioned to know sooner rather than later of system
problems that could jeopardize accomplishment of SEVIS objectives.
Further, we reported that, despite DHS actions, educational organizations
were still experiencing problems, particularly with regard to Help Desk
support,7 and we reported that although collection of a SEVIS fee had been
required since 1996, it was still not being collected, and educational
organizations were concerned about proposed fee collection options.
Accordingly, we made recommendations aimed at improving system performance
measurement and resolving educational organizations' performance issues
and fee concerns.
Over the last year, DHS reports that it has taken steps to address our
recommendations, particularly with regard to strengthening Help Desk
support. Moreover, educational organizations generally agree that SEVIS
performance has continued to improve, and that their past fee collection
concerns have been alleviated. However, despite
5 Examples of performance requirements are (1) the system is to be
available 99.5 percent of the time to all users 24 hours a day, 7 days a
week, excluding scheduled downtime and (2) the time to respond to user
queries, as measured as the response time between the application server
and database, is to be less than 10 seconds.
6 Change requests are used to track all system changes, including
corrections to erroneous system programming, as well as planned system
enhancements.
7 The SEVIS Help Desk was established, among other things, to assist
system users by providing troubleshooting and resolution of technical
problems.
DHS actions, these educational organizations still cite residual Help Desk
problems, which they believe create hardships for students and exchange
visitors. Most of these organizations, however, do not believe that SEVIS
is the reason for the declining number of international students and
exchange visitors coming to the United States.
A recent report by the Council of Graduate Schools cites declines in U.S.
international graduate school applications, admissions, and enrollments
between 2003 and 2004, and further declines in these applications between
2004 and 2005.8 The report attributes the decline to increased global
competition and changed visa policies. We recently reported on the State
Department's efforts to address our prior recommendations for improving
the Visas Mantis program, an interagency security check that often affects
foreign science students and scholars applying for visas to come to the
United States.In particular, we reported that a combination of federal
agency steps had resulted in a significant decline in Visas Mantis
processing times and in the number of Mantis cases pending more than 60
days. The Council of Graduate Schools' report also recognizes the recent
Visas Mantis program changes as positive steps.
Background
Within DHS's Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) organization, the
Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP) is responsible for certifying
schools to accept foreign students in academic and vocational programs and
for managing SEVIS. Schools and exchange programs were required to start
using SEVIS for new students and exchange visitors beginning February 15,
2003,
8 Council of Graduate Schools, Findings from the 2005 CGS International
Graduate Admissions Survey I. We did not independently verify the
information in this report.
and for all continuing students and exchange visitors beginning August 1,
2003. 9
The following tables show the number of active students, exchange
visitors, and institutions registered in SEVIS as of February 28, 2005.
Table 1: Number of Active Students and Exchange Visitors in SEVIS
a
Category Number Percent
F visa holders 605,664 80
M visa holders 3,853
J visa holders 142,901 19
Total active students and exchange visitors registered in SEVIS b 752,418
100
Source: DHS.
a
F visas are for academic study at 2- and 4-year colleges and universities
and other academic institutions; M visas are for nonacademic study at
institutions, such as vocational and technical schools; and J visas for
participation in exchange programs. SEVIS manages information for foreign
students and exchange visitors having any of these types of visas (8
U.S.C. S: 1101 (a) (15)).
b State commented that some persons enrolled in SEVIS are not issued
visas, and other persons may have more than one SEVIS record.
Table 2: Number of Institutions in SEVIS Category Number Percent
Technical schools, colleges, and universities 7,984 85
Exchange visitor programs 1,453 15
Institutions in SEVIS 9437 100
Source: DHS.
SEVP is also responsible for providing program policies and plans;
performing program analysis; and conducting communications, outreach, and
training. Regarding SEVIS, SEVP is responsible for identifying and
prioritizing system requirements, performing system release management,
monitoring system performance, and correcting data errors.
9 According to program officials, SEVIS was available to certify schools
on July 1, 2002, and to register students on July 15, 2002. According to
State, SEVIS was available to exchange visitor programs in October 2002.
The Office of Information Resource Management, also part of ICE, manages
the information technology infrastructure (that is, hardware and system
software) on which the SEVIS application software is hosted. It also
manages the SEVIS Help Desk and the systems life cycle process for the
system, including system operations and maintenance.
The software for the SEVIS application runs on a system infrastructure
that supports multiple DHS Internet-based applications. The infrastructure
includes common services, such as application servers, Web servers,
database servers, and network connections. SEVIS shares five application
servers and two Web servers with two other applications.
To assist system users, the SEVIS Help Desk was established, which
provides three levels of support, known as tiers:
0M Tier 1 provides initial end-user troubleshooting and resolution of
technical problems.
0M Tier 2 provides escalation and resolution support for Tier 1, and makes
necessary changes to the database (data fixes).
0M Tier 3 addresses the resolution of policy and procedural issues, and
also makes data fixes. 10
SEVP uses a contractor to operate Tiers 1 and 2. Both the contractor and
the program office operate Tier 3. According to an SEVP official,
contactor staff for Tiers 1 through 3 include the following: Tier 1 has 21
staff, Tier 2 has 6 staff, and Tier 3 has 13 staff.
Data are entered into SEVIS through one of two methods:
0M Real-time interface (i.e., an individual manually enters a single
student/exchange visitor record) or
0M Batch processing (i.e., several student/exchange visitor records are
uploaded to SEVIS at one time using vendor-provided software or software
created by the school/exchange visitor program).
10 According to State, fixes to records of J visas are made at Tier 3
after it reviews and approves the changes.
SEVIS Data and Users
SEVIS collects a variety of data that are used by schools, exchange
visitor programs, and DHS and State Department organizations to oversee
foreign students, exchange visitors, and the schools and exchange visitor
programs themselves. Data collected include information on students,
exchange visitors, schools, and exchange visitor programs. For example,
o biographical information (e.g., student or exchange visitor's name,
place and date of birth, and dependents' information),
o academic information (e.g., student or exchange visitor's status, date
of study commencement, degree program, field of study, and institution
disciplinary action),
o school information (e.g., campus address, type of education or degrees
offered, and session dates);
o exchange visitor program information (e.g., status and type of program,
responsible program officials, and program duration).
SEVIS data are also used by a variety of users. Table 3 provides examples
of users and how each uses the data.
Table 3: Examples of How Data Are Used by Different Types of Users
Users How data are used
ICE and CISa personnel Certify schools' applications to use SEVIS and
reinstate students.
Port of entry inspectors Admit foreign students and exchange visitors into
the United States at the ports of entry.
Intelligence officers Conduct analyses and research regarding student and
exchange visitors who may be out of status, and schools and exchange
programs that may be in violation of program rules.
Determine if agents should take corrective actions against individuals,
schools, or exchange visitor programs.
Identify patterns of criminal activity, including terrorism, narcotics,
alien smuggling, trade fraud, weapons proliferation, and money laundering,
as well as immigration fraud.
Investigators Conduct analyses and research regarding student and
exchange visitors who may be out of status, and schools and exchange
visitor programs that may be in violation of program rules.
Identify possible status violators and contact them to determine if they
are in fact in violation; pass on valid leads to agents for enforcement
activities. According to Office of Investigations officials, they have
received about 31,000 leads from SEVIS since the summer of 2003.
State consular officers Compare information on the hard copy I-20 b or
DS-2019,c such as the applicant's name, date and place of birth, and SEVIS
identification number, against information that has been automatically
extracted from SEVIS to State's Consolidated Consular Database to issue
visas.
Exchange visitor program designation personnel
Administer exchange program rules and regulations in order to approve
designation applications, including inputting certain actions for exchange
visitors such as reinstatement, change of category, and extension beyond
the maximum duration of the stay. Enter information on the receipt of
applications, fees, and requested information.
Schools and exchange visitor program users
Principal designated official Submits and updates the school's
certification application and adds, removes, or replaces other users for
the school. Creates and updates student eligibility records.
Responsible officer Submits and updates the exchange program's
certification application and adds, removes, or replaces other users for
the program. Creates and updates exchange visitor eligibility records.
Source: DHS.
a Citizenship and Immigration Services.
b Form I-20A-B: Certificate of Eligibility for Nonimmigrant (F-1) Student
Status-for Academic and Language Students or Form I-20M-N: Certificate of
Eligibility for Nonimmigrant (M-1) Student Status-for Vocational Students.
c Form DS-2019: Certificate of Eligibility for Exchange Visitor (J-1)
Status.
Following Significant Early Challenges, SEVIS Performance
Improved, but Problems Remained In 2002 and 2003, when SEVIS first began
operating and was first required to be used, significant problems were
reported. For example, colleges, universities, and exchange programs could
not gain access to the system, and when access was obtained, these users'
sessions would "time out" before they could complete their tasks. In June
2004, we reported that several performance indicators showed that SEVIS
performance was improving. These indicators included system performance
reports, requests for system changes to address problems, and feedback
from educational organizations representing school and exchange programs.
Each indicator is discussed below.
Some Key System Requirements Were Being Met, but Not All Were Being
Measured
Whether defined system requirements are being met is one indicator of
system performance. In June 2004, we reported that performance reports
showed that some, but not all, key system requirements were being
measured, and that these measured requirements were being met. Table 4
shows examples of key system performance requirements.
Table 4: Examples of Performance Requirements
Type Requirement
a
System availability Be available 99.5 percent of the time to all users 24
hours a day, 7 days a week, excluding scheduled downtime.
Response time Return a record in less than 10 seconds in response to a
query using the identification number. (Time is measured from application
server to database and back to application server.)
Capacity Create at least 5,000,000 new records per year, store at least
12,500,000 eligibility records, and handle at least 7,500,000 record
updates per year.
Resource usage Identify when usage exceeds 50 percent of allocated
resources for (1) central processing unit, (2) disk space, (3) random
access memory, and (4) network usage.
Source: DHS.
a System availability is defined as the time the system is operating
satisfactorily, expressed as a percentage of time that the system is
required to be operational.
However, we also reported that not all key performance requirements were
being adequately measured. For example, reports used to measure system
availability measured the time that the system infrastructure11 was
successfully connected to the network. While these reports can be used to
identify problems that could affect the system availability, they do not
fully measure SEVIS availability. Instead, they measure the availability
of the communications software on the application servers. This means that
the SEVIS application could still be unavailable even though the
communications software is available.
Similarly, program officials stated that they used a central processing
unit activity report to measure resource usage. However, this report
focuses on the shared infrastructure environment, which supports SEVIS and
two other applications, and does not specifically measure SEVIS-related
central processing performance. Program officials did not provide any
reports that measured performance against other resource usage
requirements, such as random access memory and network usage.
Program officials acknowledged that some key performance requirements were
not formally measured and stated that they augmented these formal
performance measurement reports with other, less formal measures, such as
browsing the daily Help Desk logs to determine if there were serious
performance problems requiring system changes or modifications, as well as
using the system themselves on a continuous basis. According to these
officials, a combination of formal performance reports and less formal
performance monitoring efforts gave them a sufficient picture of how well
SEVIS was performing. Further, program officials stated that they were
exploring additional tools to monitor system performance. For example,
they stated that they were in the process of implementing a new tool to
capture the availability of the SEVIS application, and that they planned
to begin using it by the end of April 2004.
11 This infrastructure supports multiple DHS Internet-based applications.
Page 10 GAO-05-440T
However, unless DHS formally monitored and documented all key system
performance requirements, we concluded that the department could not
adequately assure itself that potential system problems were identified
and addressed early, before they had a chance to become larger problems
that could affect the DHS mission objectives that SEVIS supports.
Trends in Reported System Problems Indicated Improved Performance
Another indicator of how well a system is performing is the number and
significance of reported problems or requests for system enhancements. For
SEVIS, a system change request (SCR) is created when a change is required
to the system. Each of the change requests is assigned a priority of
critical, high, medium, or low, as defined in table 5.
Table 5: Definitions of Priority Levels Priority Description
Critical System capability is significantly prevented, seriously degraded,
or
a
compromised.
High System capability is significantly degraded, or the potential exists
for significant or serious impact on the system, but the problem does not
necessarily impede the system from functioning.
Medium System capability is affected, but it is not a serious degradation
in performance or usability.
Low Problem causes only an inconvenience, annoyance, or lack of
userfriendliness, or the request is a recommended change for future
releases.
Source: DHS.
a According to program officials, SCRs may be upgraded to critical or high
priority, without regard to system capability, for practical and policy
considerations, because the priority assigned affects the inclusion of an
SCR in a system change.
Each change request is also categorized by the type, such as changes to
correct system errors, enhance or modify the system, or improve system
performance.
In June 2004, we reported that the number of critical or high priority
change requests that were created between January 2003 and February 2004
was decreasing. Similarly, we reported that the trends in the number of
new change requests that were to correct system errors had decreased for
that same period. Over this period, the number of corrective fixes
requested each month between
January 2003 and February 2004 decreased, with the most dramatic decrease
in the first 7 months. Figure 1 shows the decreasing trend in SEVIS new
corrective change requests between January 2003 and February 2004.
Figure 1: Decreasing Trend in New Corrective SCRs between January 2003 and
February 2004
Educational Organizations Reported that System Performance Improved, but
Identified Residual Problems Despite DHS Efforts to Address Them
A third indicator of performance is user feedback. According to
representatives of educational organizations, overall SEVIS performance at
the time of our report had improved since the system began operating and
its use was required, and the program's outreach and responsiveness were
good. In addition, these representatives told us that they were no longer
experiencing earlier reported problems, which involved user access to the
system, the system's timing out before users could complete their tasks,
and
merging data from one school or exchange visitor program with data from
another.
However, seven new problem types were identified by at least 3 of the 10
organizations, and three of the seven problems were related to Help Desk
performance. Table 6 shows the problems and the number of organizations
that identified them.
Table 6: SEVIS Problems Identified by Organizations
Organizations citing problem ExampleProblem
1. Inability to download data so that users could
7 A user needed a report showing the number of students who are
manipulate it themselves and create useful reports
registered for training outside the school in which they are enrolled.
However, SEVIS allows a user to view only 20 such records at a time, and
because her school had over 800 foreign students, she had to run the SEVIS
report repeatedly to get the full list.
2. Slow Tier 2 and 3 Help Desk responses 7 A correction to a student's
status took 6 weeks to fix.
3. Incomplete record updates in the nightly transmission from SEVIS to the
Consolidated Consular Database
6 A foreign visitor was denied a visa at the consulate because the birth
date on the hard copy form did not match the birth date in the automated
record.
4. Inconsistent Help Desk answers to technical
5 A user received varying Help Desk responses for how to record
questions
multiple training records for a student.
5. Incorrect Help Desk answers to policy 3 A user was told that she did
not need to sign a student's I-20 a for
questions travel purposes, but the signature was required at the port of
entry.
6. Insufficient identification of schools in SEVIS pull-down menus for
transfer purposes
3 A user attempting to transfer a student to a college in Arizona
erroneously selected a college in California with a similar name.
7. Unexplained data differences in SEVIS 3 A user entered data and printed
a form showing the correct information. Subsequently the data were found
to be different in SEVIS.
Source: GAO analysis of organization data.
a Certificate of Eligibility for Nonimmigrant Student Status.
At the time of our report, DHS had taken a number of steps to identify and
solve system problems, including problems identified by educational
organizations. In particular, DHS steps to identify problems included
0M holding biweekly internal performance meetings and weekly technical
meetings,
0M holding biweekly12 conference calls with representatives from
educational organizations,
0M establishing special e-mail accounts to report user problems, and
0M having user groups test new releases.
Further, DHS cited actions intended to address six of the seven types of
problems identified by the educational organizations. These included
releases of new versions of SEVIS and increases in Help Desk training and
staffing. These officials also stated that they were evaluating potential
solutions to the remaining problem.
Table 7 shows the problem types, the number of organizations that
identified them, and DHS's actions taken to address each.
Table 7: DHS Actions to Address User Problems
Organizations Problem citing problem DHS actions
1. Inability to download data so that users could 7 Software options to
extract user requested data, provide manipulate it themselves and create
useful summary reports, and perform statistical analyses were being
reports evaluated.
2. Slow Tier 2 and 3 Help Desk responses 7 In March 2003, Tier 2 staffing
increased from 8 to 9 people, and Tier 3 staffing increased from 5 to 8
people.
3. Incomplete record updates in the nightly transmission sent from SEVIS
to the Consolidated Consular Database
6 On January 2, 2004, a software change was implemented in Release 4.8.
4. Inconsistent Help Desk answers to technical
5 Since June 2002, training is provided to Help Desk staff every
questions time a new release is implemented or a major workaround is
devised.
5. Incorrect Help Desk answers to policy questions 3 Since June 2002,
training is provided to Help Desk staff every time a new release is
implemented or a major workaround is devised.
6. Insufficient identification of schools in SEVIS 3 Since July 2003, the
list of school codes needed in SEVIS has
pull-down menus for transfer purposes
been available on the DHS Web site, with the schools identified by city
and state.
7. Unexplained data differences in SEVIS 3 On May 11, 2003, a software
change was implemented in Release 4.6.2.
Source: GAO and DHS.
Despite DHS actions, educational organizations told us that some problems
persisted. For example:
12 The conference calls were being held weekly until January 2004. Page 14
GAO-05-440T
0M Although the program office increased Help Desk staffing in March 2003,
representatives from seven organizations stated that slow Tier 2 and 3
Help Desk responses were still a problem. In response, program officials
stated that the majority of calls handled by Tiers 2 and 3 involve data
fixes that are a direct result of end-user error, and that fixing them is
sometimes delayed until end-users submit documentation reflecting the
nature of the data fix needed and the basis for the change.
0M Although the program office began in June 2002 providing training to
Help Desk staff each time a new SEVIS release was implemented,
representatives from 5 of the 10 organizations stated that the quality of
the Help Desk's response to technical and policy questions remained a
problem. According to program officials, Help Desk response is complicated
by variations in user platforms and enduser knowledge of computers. The
officials added that the program office is working to educate SEVIS users
on the distinction between platform problems and problems resulting from
SEVIS. Further, they said that Help Desk responses may be complicated by
the caller's failure to provide complete information regarding the
problem. Program officials also stated that supervisors frequently review
Help Desk tickets to ensure the accuracy of responses, and these reviews
had not surfaced any continuing problems in the quality of the responses.
SEVIS Fee Was Not Being Collected, and Educational Organizations Were
Concerned about Fee Payment Options
Various legislation13 requires that a fee be collected from each foreign
student and exchange visitor to cover the costs of administering and
maintaining SEVIS, as well as SEVP operations. In 2004, we reported that 7
years had passed since collection of the fee was required, and thus
millions of dollars in revenue had been and would continue to be lost
until the fee was actually collected. We also reported that
representatives of the educational organizations
13 The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996
(IIRIRA) first required that schools and exchange programs collect the fee
(Pub. L. 104-208, Div. C, Sept. 30, 1996). The Visa Waiver Permanent
Program Act (2000) amended IIRIRA to require that the government collect
the SEVIS fee (Pub. L. 106-396, Oct. 30, 2000).
were concerned with the fee payment options being considered because the
options were either not available to all students in developing countries,
or they would result in significant delays to an already lengthy visa
application and review process, and increase the risk that paper receipts
would be lost or stolen.
As we then reported, DHS's submission of its fee collection rule went to
the Office of Management and Budget in February 2004, and it received
final clearance in May 2004. The final rule,14 which was effective on
September 1, 2004, (1) set the fee at $100 for nonimmigrant students and
exchange visitors and no more than $35 for those J-1 visa-holders who are
au pairs, camp counselors, or participants in a summer work/travel
program, and (2) identified options for students and exchange visitors to
pay the fee, including
0M by mail using a check or money order drawn on a U.S. bank and payable
in U.S. dollars or
0M electronically through the Internet using a credit card.
According to DHS officials, another option for paying the SEVIS fee
permits exchange visitor programs to make bulk payments to DHS on behalf
of J visa-holders.
DHS Continues to Take Steps to Address Our Recommendations
To help strengthen SEVIS performance and address educational
organizations' concerns, our report recommended that DHS
0M assess the extent to which defined SEVIS performance requirements are
still relevant and are being formally managed;
0M provide for the measurement of key performance requirements that are
not being formally measured;
0M assess educational organization Help Desk concerns and take appropriate
action to address these concerns; and
14 69 Fed. Reg. 39814 (2004). Page 16 GAO-05-440T
0M provide for the expeditious implementation of the results of the SEVIS
fee rulemaking process.
According to program officials, a number of steps have been taken relative
to our recommendations, and other steps are under way. For example,
program officials stated that they have established a working group to
assess the relevance of the requirements in the SEVIS requirements
document. The working group is expected to provide its recommendations for
changing this document by the end of March 2005. The changed requirements
will then form the basis for measuring system performance.
Program officials also stated that they are in the process of selecting
tools for monitoring system performance and have established a working
group to define ways to measure SEVIS's satisfaction of its two main
objectives, relating to oversight and enforcement of relevant laws and
regulations and to improvement in port of entry processing of students and
visitors. In this regard, they said that they have begun to monitor the
number of false positives between SEVIS and the Arrival Departure
Information System15 to target improvements for future system releases.
Program officials also reported that they are taking steps to address Help
Desk concerns. For example, they said that they continue to hold bi-weekly
meetings with educational organizations and directly monitor select Help
Desk calls. They also said that Tier 1 Help Desk staffing recently
increased by five staff, and the knowledge-based tool used by the Help
Desk representatives to respond to caller inquiries had been updated,
including ensuring that the tool's response scripts are consistent with
SEVP policy. Additionally, these officials stated that they are reaching
out to the Department of State to more quickly resolve certain system data
errors (commonly referred to as data fixes),16 and said that a process has
been
15 The Arrival Departure Information System is a component of the U.S.
Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology system that stores
traveler arrival and departure data and provides query and reporting
information.
16 According to State, fixes to records for J visas are made at Tier 3
after it reviews and approves the changes.
established to ensure that high-priority change requests are examined to
ensure correct priority designation and timely resolution. As of January
1, 2005, SEVP also established new performance level agreements with its
Help Desk contractor, and it has been receiving weekly Help Desk reports
to monitor performance against these agreements.
DHS also began collecting the SEVIS fee in September 2004. Additionally,
it introduced another payment option, effective November 1, 2004, whereby
students can pay the fee using Western Union. This method allows foreign
students to pay in local currency, rather than U.S. dollars. Program
officials also stated that DHS has developed a direct interface between
the payment systems and SEVIS and the State Department's Consolidated
Consular Database (CCD).17 According to these officials, this allows the
consular officer to verify without delay that the visa applicant has, in
fact, paid the SEVIS fee before completing the visa issuance process.
SEVIS Educational Organizations Report That Performance
Continues to Improve, but Some Problems Still Persist According to
representatives of educational organizations, overall SEVIS performance
continues to improve. We contacted 6 of the 10 organizations that were
part of our 2004 report on SEVIS performance, and representatives for all
six organizations told us that SEVIS performance has generally continued
to improve. In addition, five of the organizations stated that there were
no new system performance problems. All of the organizations stated that
they did not have any concerns with the SEVIS fee implementation.
However, most representatives stated that some previously reported
problems still exist. For example, representatives from five of the six
organizations stated that slow Tier 2 and 3 Help Desk responses in
correcting errors in student and exchange visitor records were
17 CCD is used by consular officers to verify that the student or exchange
visitor has been accepted by a particular school or exchange visitor
program.
still a problem. Three representatives stated that these corrections can
take months, and in some cases even years, to fix. Two of the three stated
that this has a major impact on the individuals involved. One organization
reported that some exchange visitors' records have been erroneously
terminated, and as a result, the visitors' families are unable to join
them in the United States until a data fix occurs. According to the
representative, this creates a very difficult situation for the
individuals and makes it difficult to retain them in their academic
programs. A representative for another organization reported that two
participants' records erroneously indicate that they have violated their
status as exchange visitors. Were these individuals to leave the country
to visit their families before a data fix is made, they would be denied
re-entry.
In addition, representatives from three organizations stated that they
were still experiencing problems with downloading and manipulating data
from SEVIS. For example, one representative reported an inability to pull
reports on the exact number of exchange visitors in its program and their
status. This person expressed concern because DHS holds schools and
programs accountable for tracking exchange visitors, but then does not
give them the tools necessary to do so. Further, representatives from two
organizations stated that they were still experiencing problems with
incorrect Help Desk responses. For example, one representative reported
that he was erroneously told by a Help Desk employee that there was no
need to correct an individual's record of training, yet another Help Desk
employee correctly stated that a fix was needed and gave detailed
instructions on how to make the correction.
Last, representatives from all six organizations stated that there have
been declines in international students and exchange visitors coming to
the United States. However, representatives from four of the six stated
that SEVIS was not a factor, while representatives from the remaining two
stated that SEVIS was just one of many factors. Other factors cited as
contributing to this decline, which are discussed in the following
section, were a lengthy visa application process and increased competition
by other countries for students and exchange visitors.
Recent Report Cites U.S. Decline in International Graduate
Students, While Recognizing Recent Efforts to Improve Visa
Processing for Science Students and Scholars
A recent Council of Graduate Schools report18 indicates that foreign
graduate student applications, admissions, and enrollments are declining.
According to the report, international graduate applications to U.S.
colleges and universities declined 28 percent from 2003 to 2004, resulting
in an 18 percent fall in admissions and a 6 percent drop in enrollments
for the same period. In addition, while 2005 data on admissions and
enrollments were not yet available, the report cited a 5 percent decline
in applications between 2004 and 2005. According to the report, the
declines in 2004 and in 2005 were most prominent for students from China
and India. It also noted that between 2004 and 2005 applications were
unchanged from Korea and up 6 percent from the Middle East.
The report attributes this decline to two factors: increasing capacity
abroad and visa restrictions at home. According to the report, countries
in Europe and Asia are expanding their capacity at the graduate level
through government policy changes and recruitment of international
students. At the same time, the report says that the U.S. government has
tightened the visa process since September 11, 2001, inadvertently
discouraging international graduate students through new security
procedures and visa delays.
The Council of Graduate Schools also recognized recent federal actions to
improve the student visa process. These actions are directly related to
our work on the State Department's Visas Mantis program-an interagency
security check aimed at identifying those visa applicants who may pose a
threat to our national security by illegally transferring sensitive
technology. The program often affects foreign science students and
visiting scholars whose background or proposed activity in the United
States could involve exposure to technologies that, if used against the
United States, could potentially
18 Council of Graduate Schools, Findings from the 2005 CGS International
Graduate Admissions Survey 1. We did not independently verify the data in
this report.
be harmful. In February 2004, we reported and testified19 that there were
delays in the Visas Mantis program and interoperability problems between
the State Department and the FBI that contributed to these delays and
allowed Mantis cases to get lost. We determined that it took an average of
67 days for Mantis checks to be processed and for State to notify consular
posts that the visa could be issued,20 and that many Visas Mantis cases
had been pending 60 days or more. We also determined that consular staff
at posts we visited were unsure whether they were contributing to waits
because they lacked clear program guidance. Accordingly, we recommended
that the State Department, in coordination with DHS and the FBI, develop
and implement a plan to improve the Visas Mantis process.
In February 2005, we reported that Visas Mantis processing times had
declined significantly. For example, in November 2004, the average time
was about 15 days, far lower than the average of 67 days that we reported
previously. We also found that the number of Mantis cases pending more
than 60 days has dropped significantly. Our report recognized a number of
actions that contributed to these improvements and addressed other issues
that science students and scholars face in traveling to the United States.
These actions included adding staff to process Mantis cases; defining a
procedure to expedite certain cases; providing additional guidance and
feedback to consular posts; developing an electronic tracking system for
Mantis cases; clarifying the roles and responsibilities of agencies
involved in the Mantis process; reiterating State's policy of giving
students and scholars priority scheduling for interview appointments; and
extending the validity of Mantis clearances.
Although we also identified opportunities for further refinements to the
Visas Mantis program, we believe that the actions outlined above should
allow foreign science students and scholars to obtain visas more quickly
and to travel more freely. We did not determine the
19GAO, Border Security: Improvements Needed to Reduce Time Taken to
Adjudicate Visas for Science Students and Scholars, GAO-04-443T
(Washington, D.C.: Feb. 25, 2004).
20The average of 67 days was based on a random selection of Mantis cases
submitted to the State Department between April and June 2003.
effect of these actions on the overall volume of international students
traveling to the United States. However, representatives from the academic
and international scientific community have indicated that they also
believe the actions will have a positive impact. For example, the
Association of American Universities identified the extension of Mantis
clearances as "a common-sense reform that removes an unnecessary burden
that caused enormous inconvenience for thousands of international students
and discouraged many more from coming here to study."
In closing, indications are that SEVIS performance has improved and
continues to improve, as has visa processing for foreign science students
and scholars. Moreover, recent SEVIS-related initiatives demonstrate
program officials' commitment to future improvements. This commitment is
important because educational organizations continue to report some
persistent system problems, primarily with respect to Help Desk
responsiveness in making certain "data fixes." These problems can create
hardships for foreign students and exchange visitors that can potentially
have unintended consequences relative to these foreign students and
exchange visitors applying to and enrolling in U.S. learning institutions.
Therefore, it is important for DHS to effectively manage SEVIS performance
against mission objectives and outcomes, as well as against system
requirements. To this end, we have made several recommendations to DHS
concerning SEVIS performance management.
Messrs. Chairmen, this concludes our statement. We would be happy to
answer any questions that you or members of the subcommittees may have at
this time.
Contact and Acknowledgments
If you should have any questions about this testimony, please contact
Randolph C. Hite at (202) 512-3439 or [email protected], or Jess T. Ford at
(202) 512-4128 or [email protected]. Other major contributors to this
testimony included John Brummet, Barbara Collier, Deborah Davis, Jamelyn
Payan, and Elizabeth Singer.
(310603)
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without further permission from GAO. However, because this
work may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this material
separately.
GAO's Mission
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its
constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and
accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO
examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies;
and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help
Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's
commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of
accountability, integrity, and reliability.
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost
is through GAO's Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts newly
released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To have
GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go to
www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to Updates."
Order by Mail or Phone The first copy of each printed report is free.
Additional copies are $2 each. A check or money order should be made out
to the Superintendent of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard.
Orders for 100 or more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25
percent. Orders should be sent to:
U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM Washington,
D.C. 20548
To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 TDD: (202) 512-2537 Fax: (202)
512-6061
To Report Fraud, Contact:
Waste, and Abuse in Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm
E-mail: [email protected] Programs Automated answering system: (800)
424-5454 or (202) 512-7470
Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, [email protected] (202)
512-4400Congressional U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street
NW, Room 7125 Relations Washington, D.C. 20548
Public Affairs Paul Anderson, Managing Director, [email protected] (202)
512-4800 U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149
Washington, D.C. 20548
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
*** End of document. ***