Igor's List Suggestion

[Deryck and Miho 0]

Hi all,

(I apologize in advance if this post is in the wrong forum, so please move if need be.)

While looking over the Igor's list historical stats I had a thought that it would be nice if there were an option for those who apply for an expedited K1 (or other) application could indicate such on their timeline with a checkbox or similar. This would paint a more accurate picture for both those that are using either the normal process or the expedited process when it displays 'similar timelines' for the user.

When looking at my timeline for instance, I discovered through other forum posts that some of the 'similar timelines' shown alongside mine are from folks that have used the expedited process. I can only assume that their shorter days to NOA2 average into the times to NOA2 for all applications, expedited or not, making the estimated times for the normal process appear shorter than they will likely be. If there was a way to separate these, estimates for both groups would be far more accurate.

Just a thought. Has anyone else considered this as well?

Best of luck to all in the process!

Regards,

Deryck

[Starlight95 1]

Hi all,

(I apologize in advance if this post is in the wrong forum, so please move if need be.)

While looking over the Igor's list historical stats I had a thought that it would be nice if there were an option for those who apply for an expedited K1 (or other) application could indicate such on their timeline with a checkbox or similar. This would paint a more accurate picture for both those that are using either the normal process or the expedited process when it displays 'similar timelines' for the user.

When looking at my timeline for instance, I discovered through other forum posts that some of the 'similar timelines' shown alongside mine are from folks that have used the expedited process. I can only assume that their shorter days to NOA2 average into the times to NOA2 for all applications, expedited or not, making the estimated times for the normal process appear shorter than they will likely be. If there was a way to separate these, estimates for both groups would be far more accurate.

Just a thought. Has anyone else considered this as well?

Best of luck to all in the process!

Yes, this is a great idea. This would definitely give us an accurate estimate. The other suggesstion I had was I wish there was a reminder email sent to those that did not update their timeline. Some of these people seem to think that updating their timeline on their posts is the way to go. But, that does not give us a good estimate, or clean up Igor's list.

Regards,

Deryck

[ScottThuy 140]

Hi all,

(I apologize in advance if this post is in the wrong forum, so please move if need be.)

While looking over the Igor's list historical stats I had a thought that it would be nice if there were an option for those who apply for an expedited K1 (or other) application could indicate such on their timeline with a checkbox or similar. This would paint a more accurate picture for both those that are using either the normal process or the expedited process when it displays 'similar timelines' for the user.

When looking at my timeline for instance, I discovered through other forum posts that some of the 'similar timelines' shown alongside mine are from folks that have used the expedited process. I can only assume that their shorter days to NOA2 average into the times to NOA2 for all applications, expedited or not, making the estimated times for the normal process appear shorter than they will likely be. If there was a way to separate these, estimates for both groups would be far more accurate.

Just a thought. Has anyone else considered this as well?

Best of luck to all in the process!

Yes, this is a great idea. This would definitely give us an accurate estimate. The other suggesstion I had was I wish there was a reminder email sent to those that did not update their timeline. Some of these people seem to think that updating their timeline on their posts is the way to go. But, that does not give us a good estimate, or clean up Igor's list.

Regards,

Deryck

Capt Ewok already sends emails out to those that may need to update timelines....

[Starlight95 1]

Hi all,

(I apologize in advance if this post is in the wrong forum, so please move if need be.)

While looking over the Igor's list historical stats I had a thought that it would be nice if there were an option for those who apply for an expedited K1 (or other) application could indicate such on their timeline with a checkbox or similar. This would paint a more accurate picture for both those that are using either the normal process or the expedited process when it displays 'similar timelines' for the user.

When looking at my timeline for instance, I discovered through other forum posts that some of the 'similar timelines' shown alongside mine are from folks that have used the expedited process. I can only assume that their shorter days to NOA2 average into the times to NOA2 for all applications, expedited or not, making the estimated times for the normal process appear shorter than they will likely be. If there was a way to separate these, estimates for both groups would be far more accurate.

Just a thought. Has anyone else considered this as well?

Best of luck to all in the process!

Yes, this is a great idea. This would definitely give us an accurate estimate. The other suggesstion I had was I wish there was a reminder email sent to those that did not update their timeline. Some of these people seem to think that updating their timeline on their posts is the way to go. But, that does not give us a good estimate, or clean up Igor's list.

Regards,

Deryck

Capt Ewok already sends emails out to those that may need to update timelines....

It's annoying that they still don't do it .

[TBoneTX 46,067]

The OP's well-stated (and very literate -- thank you) post makes sense, si man. The question is whether the system can be massaged to enable the inclusion of such information, and whether past members or people who have already gone through expedition (expeditiousness?) can be wheedled into checking the appropriate box, si man. The Captain will have to comment.

[Captain Ewok 1,900]

Does anynoe know when apps are expedited and how often. Is it only in emergencies for example.

[English Muffin 59]

I wouldn't have thought there were enough expedites for it to make a difference.

I could be wrong though, I was once before.

[Kathryn41 3,205]

I haven't seen a lot of expedited files. The only ones I recall seeing are for military personnel facing deployment.

[Twisted K 2]

USCIS Expedite Criteria

All expedite requests are reviewed on a case-by-case basis, and are granted at the discretion of the Director. The criteria are as follows:

•Severe financial loss to company or individual

•Extreme emergent situation

•Humanitarian situation

•Nonprofit status of requesting organization in furtherance of the cultural and social interests of the United States

•Department of Defense of National Interest Situation (Note: Request must come from official United States Government entity and state that delay will be detrimental to our Government)

•USCIS error

•Compelling interest of USCIS

source: USCIS Expedite Criteria

[TBoneTX 46,067]

USCIS Expedite Criteria

This fascinating list should definitely be pinned in each of the upper forums. Doing so would eliminate a lot of the same steady questions about whether it's possible to speed things up.

[Nik+Heather 121]

Well, there is a lot of different information that might be interesting to know which would put a timeline in more context.

Expedite (I think typically military), or (confirmed) extended background checks, AP at NVC, whichever. Maybe one main category for extraordinary processing, including background checks, and then sub categories which become available for petition phase, NVC phase, embassy phase. Then, if you find yourself in one of those situations, you can look at the time lines of others who have been in that situation.

Also, I'm not sure if we do it already, but is the time required for a response from someone subtracted from the total time? ie: couple X receives packet 3 on April 1, decides they want to delay for some reason and doesn't send it back until May1, and gets their interview June 1. I think it should count as only 1 month, not 2 in terms of how long it takes to get to the interview...

I'm not a statistician, so maybe this breaks down the sample such that it is too small to be significant enough of a representation...

[Deryck and Miho 0]

I appreciate all the responses so far. As far as the expedited processing goes, I am sure that it really is the exception to the rule but statistical averaging can be swayed greatly when comparing a small sample size. After all, when displaying 'similar timelines' it defaults to a max of 20. Mine is an example of an extreme case with only 9 similar timelines found, and 2 of them have been expedited (I asked).

Here are the numbers from my 'similar timelines' output. I left out the fields that had a value of zero:

Total Records: 9

Num with I-129F 1st NOA Received: 9

Avg. Days to 1st NOA: 7

Num with I-129F 1st and 2nd NOA Received: 2

Avg. Days btw I-129F 1st NOA and 2nd NOA: 68

Num with Interview Date: 1

Avg. Days btw I-129F 2nd NOA and Interview: 83

As you can see from a small sample size of 9 records, 2 of them being expedites, and the remaining 7 with no NOA2 yet, the days from NOA1-->NOA2 are pretty optimistic.

Really I only posed this question as a point of interest as the numbers provided have no effect on when MY milestones will actually be reached But it of course never hurts to look for improvements to even a already-great resource like Igor's List. I like the suggestion above about exceptional delays also. Background investigations, lost or delayed mailings, even procrastination likely have a noticeable effect of the overall averages.

I love numbers (apparently) and what better way to pass the days until NOA2?

Regards,

Deryck

[Nik+Heather 121]

I appreciate all the responses so far. As far as the expedited processing goes, I am sure that it really is the exception to the rule but statistical averaging can be swayed greatly when comparing a small sample size. After all, when displaying 'similar timelines' it defaults to a max of 20. Mine is an example of an extreme case with only 9 similar timelines found, and 2 of them have been expedited (I asked).

Here are the numbers from my 'similar timelines' output. I left out the fields that had a value of zero:

Total Records: 9

Num with I-129F 1st NOA Received: 9

Avg. Days to 1st NOA: 7

Num with I-129F 1st and 2nd NOA Received: 2

Avg. Days btw I-129F 1st NOA and 2nd NOA: 68

Num with Interview Date: 1

Avg. Days btw I-129F 2nd NOA and Interview: 83

As you can see from a small sample size of 9 records, 2 of them being expedites, and the remaining 7 with no NOA2 yet, the days from NOA1-->NOA2 are pretty optimistic.

Really I only posed this question as a point of interest as the numbers provided have no effect on when MY milestones will actually be reached But it of course never hurts to look for improvements to even a already-great resource like Igor's List. I like the suggestion above about exceptional delays also. Background investigations, lost or delayed mailings, even procrastination likely have a noticeable effect of the overall averages.

I love numbers (apparently) and what better way to pass the days until NOA2?

Regards,

Deryck

Yes, I spend many days with the timeline data in excel, playing around trying to remove "outlier" data.... I ended up just using the handy chart next to the latest 15 approved in the end. As I watched January go up, I got more and more excited!