The Long Read (did someone whine
the Long Ranger Writes Again?)
Processing time information published/posted by IRCC is NOT an average. Not even the mean.
To the extent some of the comments about the processing times is about criticizing the usefulness of this information, YEP and YEP, and I agree. While the IRCC processing times information is useful, that is only in a rather limited respect, and IRCC could provide far more useful, informative statistical data about processing times. This is one of those areas in which transparency has severely declined (it should be noted, however, with emphasis, that this trend began with policies and practices adopted in the Harper era . . . including, in particular, a sweeping cutback in providing statistical information implemented by Harper's government nearly a decade and a half ago).
The current information is helpful in some respects, mostly as an outer parameter; most applicants can reasonably anticipate their application will take no longer, or at least not much longer, than the currently published processing times. If it goes longer, that signals a problem. The latter is subject to recognizing trends due to collateral circumstances; in early 2020, for example, no wizardry required to forecast timelines were going to go longer, much longer, than those then published by IRCC, given the obvious impending impact of suspended services due to Covid. At the other end of the spectrum, it is readily apparent that new applicants are mostly not facing processing timelines as long as those currently published, as the impact of Covid wanes.
For those who shrug, if not wince, and feel that is not offering all that much. YEP. Too true.
Meanwhile, there is good reason why many here emphasize the variability in the timeline for individual applicants.
Calculating Processing Times:
While not all "
processing times" information published by IRCC is calculated the same way, the processing times published for citizenship applications are calculated very similar to the general approach employed by IRCC, as stated in
the FAQ: "
Our processing times are historical, meaning they’re measured based on how long it took to process 80% of applications in the past." Which is similarly stated when the processing times for citizenship is queried at the IRCC website: "
This processing time tells you how long it took us to process most complete applications in the past."
What we do not know is what period of time in the past the calculation is based on. This can vary depending on the type of application. And it can make a huge difference. Processing times for applications made during the calendar year 2020, for example, or 2021, are undoubtedly way, way longer than processing times for applications made during the first six months of 2023. Perhaps the currently published times are based on applications made during the year 2022, or some portion of that or another relatively recent period of time. Note: to learn the period of time the calculation is based on, that is information that could be obtained through the ATI process (not to be confused with ATIP requests for personal information), by someone with sufficient experience (if not expertise) in making an effective ATI request (doing this can be tricky).
Quibbling a bit: Damn IRCC and its careless, almost glib use of language. Note the difference between the FAQ and the citizenship application specific description of how the processing times are calculated: references "
most" versus "
80%" . . . I am not certain, but my bet is that the citizenship processing times are based on how long it took to process 80% of applications, which is very likely significantly longer than it took to process 50% plus 1 (that is "
most") during the same historical period of time. But maybe it is indeed based on most, on how long it took to process 50% percent of the applications (plus one) made rather than, as for other application processing times, 80%.
Leading to . . .
Clarifying what "how long it took to process 80% of applications" means --
Time flies. Seems like it was not all that long ago CIC (before the name change to IRCC) was publishing how long it took to process 20% of routinely processed applications; 50% of routinely processed applications; and 80% of routinely processed applications. But, actually, yeah time flies, that was well over a decade ago. Nonetheless, even after CIC (then IRCC) went to publishing only the processing times for 80% of applications, the data for 20% and 50% was still available and could still be relatively easily found in government statistical information sources (for all sorts of immigration applications), and even after that ceased (thank Harper era cutbacks), this data could still be obtained through ATI requests (again, not to be confused with ATIP requests for personal information). But of course access to such information depends on the government capturing and maintaining such statistical data. It has been a good while since I tried accessing this information, so I do not know whether the government continues to capture these statistics at this level of detail.
I reference the 20% and 50% statistics, in addition those for 80%, because they help illuminate what "
how long it took to process 80% of applications" means.
Simplifying it a bit: count the total number of applications made during a particular period of time (in the past for citizenship applications the period of time was a full year, and which year that was, was included in the information), report how long it took for 20% of those applications to be processed, likewise 50%, and 80%. When CIC offered this level of detail it still did not say how long the process would take for incoming applications but it did offer a scale showing how long it took, during the specified period of time, for the fasted group (the first 20% completely processed), and the mean or median group (50%, noting that one more would be "
most"), and how long it took to get four out of five applications through the process (80%). Moreover, back then problematic applications were not included in the calculation, so these numbers were quite representative of applications made by qualified, typical applicants. These stats reflected what most applicants could reasonably expect.
For citizenship applications (in comparison to PR visa applications) there tended to be only a small difference between how long it took to process 20% versus 50%, while most years the timeline for 80% tended to be near double how long it took for 50%. This suggested that at least half, most perhaps but not a lot more than half, were processed in approximately the same amount of time. Makes sense. No-issue, clearly qualified applicants sailing through in roughly the same amount of time; but for those running into this or that issue, it was longer . . . roughly twice as long.
It has been many years since I last saw statistics at this level of detail, now IRCC only gives us how long it took to process 80% of all applications made during some unspecified previous period of time, and a lot has changed in the meantime (including the rules regarding physical presence), so it is hard to say how likely there is a similar proportion now . . . that is, given the current 18 month timeline, for 80%, as published by IRCC, whether that means it is likely that half were processed in 9 or 10 months. My guess is that is not far off.
Unless the reference to "
most" in the processing time for citizenship applications really does mean just most, not the standard 80%.
Also note, another very significant change in what IRCC is reporting demands attention: until not very long ago the 80% calculation used to be based on how long it took to process
ROUTINELY processed applications. Now the calculation is based on how long it took to process
COMPLETE applications. (I failed to take note as to when this transition happened.) This likely makes the published timeline even more disproportionate to what the typical, qualified applicant can anticipate. Further compromising the usefulness of this information.
Overriding Caveat: Timelines for particular individual applicants can and does vary widely.
