Citizenship test: Collective action required, or expect endless delays, years. Example of the effective lobbyng of people awaiting spousal sponsorship

[MrChazz]

I have gone through that entire document now. Much of it is repetitive and not very helpful. But there are places where one can find some interesting stuff, for example proof that for IRCC this is all about numbers and KPI.

It is bad enough that IRCC has been ignoring applications from 2 or 3 years ago, in favor of meeting KPIs for 2020 and 2021. This latest document contains an incredible proposal that goes even beyond that: that they should prioritize e-applications (over paper ones) because that would make it easier to hit target numbers. Apparently, never mind when the paper ones were submitted.

 

[dpenabill]

Alright folks, after going back and forth with them, I have finally received the IRCC corporate records pertaining to the citizenship program. I believe this file contains data up until August 25th, 2021.

Here's the link to the file =>

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1aCg_6UPD2gIHto33Vhz6RM1EQ_L4dYnu/view?usp=sharing

Good luck!

Data is good. Information is good. Sharing is good. Much appreciated.

Perhaps I should qualify, getting data and information is good. And I expect and hope this is also good data. Relying on the integrity of IRCC is, for the most part, warranted, but some here tend to challenge or outright dismiss information coming from IRCC.

Not all the information provided is data. Beyond the data there is illuminating stuff, here and there, in this material. The outline of the process on page 196 (of the pdf file), for example, helps affirm what we know about the "steps" taken in processing grant citizenship applications. Comparison with the seven steps that take place in the local office, as listed on page 213 (despite redactions), helps to further illuminate how the process actually works. Another view of workflow or steps in processing is on page 252. There is also the table about time allocated for the various steps, which similarly illuminates information about the particular steps in the process, beginning on page 257. Of course these outlines need to be viewed and understood in context with other information and what we otherwise know about how things actually work.

Some take the particular steps in the process for granted, but many queries and misguided commentaries in the forum obviously are rooted in either not knowing or misunderstanding the process. It always helps to get more information reinforcing or correcting what we already know about how the process actually works.

The allocation of time (again, see table beginning on page 257) is illuminating. Actual time spent "processing" an individual's citizenship application appears to TOTAL, on an average, barely two hours plus a bit. And knowing how averages work (compared, say, to the median), this indicates that IRCC personnel spend significantly less than a total of two hours on the majority of applications. As I have often emphasized, the vast, vast majority of time applications are merely sitting in queue waiting for the next step . . . so it takes a year to 18 months (and more for too many) for personnel at IRCC to spend a total of less than two hours dealing with the application.

All this comes with a big CAUTION . . . apart from the statistical reports, these are COPIES of documents which are not necessarily operative information. Many of the included copies are documents about assessments or projections or strategies or recommendations. Nonetheless, among the more interesting aspects addressed is the prospect of knowledge of Canada testing potentially migrating to online testing permanently, not just as a temporary measure during the Pandemic, and centralizing that.

Back to the data: there are three salient, overriding observations:

-- as of September 11, 2021 there were over 400k applications in process, an absolutely staggering number

-- rate of applications reaching a disposition (meaning, mostly, the grant of citizenship) have been improving significantly during the year, but

-- IRCC continues to fall further and further behind

Some Particular, Distinguishing Data Points:

Data shows big swings . . . for GTA offices applications resolved (vast majority are grants of citizenship, some refusals, some other dispositions) week of August 15 to 21, 2021, total resolved is 2155, while during the week September 5 to 11, 2021, total was just 819
page 131

Compare that to the best week for the GTA from December 6, 2020 to Jan 2, 2021, which was the week December 13 to December 19, 2020, which saw final dispositions in just 120 cases that week. There was a total of just 371 for the GTA for the entire month (four weeks). (page 61)

Note that the GTA had 108,859 applications in process as of September 11, 2021 compared to 84,697 as of January 3, 2021 . . . illustrating that during this year IRCC continue to fall further and further behind at an rapid, depressing, and it needs to be said, unacceptable rate. (pages 132 and 62)

Likewise note that all the Western region, all the offices from Winnipeg to BC, had 113,143 applications in process as of September 11, 2021 compared to 87,411 as of January 3, 2021 . . . not falling behind at the same rate as offices in the GTA, but still very much too much in the wrong direction. (pages 132 and 62)

There are many comparisons worth examining and interpreting. Compare, for one isolated example

-- the number of test ready applications as of September 11, 2021:​

-- -- Vancouver Office 7,008 and for all Western offices in total, 32,730​

​

-- the number of "Under Review" (post-test mostly I believe) as of September 11, 2021:​

-- -- Vancouver Office 5,578 and for all Western offices in total, 37,332​

​

-- ceremony ready compared to scheduled:​

-- -- Vancouver Office 3,699/766 and for all Western offices in total, 16,316/2,647​

And compare that with the numbers as of January 3, 2021

-- the number of test ready applications as of January 3, 2021:​

-- -- Vancouver Office 7,684 and for all Western offices in total, 28,981​

​

-- the number of "Under Review" (post-test mostly I believe) as of January 3, 2021:​

-- -- Vancouver Office 3,821 and for all Western offices in total, 19,345​

​

-- ceremony ready compared to scheduled:​

-- -- Vancouver Office 311/40 and for all Western offices in total, 1,386/153​

Odds and ends
-- "Around 50% of clients in the testing inventory require a program integrity interview" (page 136). Note that under pre-covid procedures, ALL adult applicants were subject to the PI interview. The PI interview, by the way, is repeatedly referenced as a "choking" point, a step in the process which is a bottleneck significantly slowing processing down.


Note regarding data about criminality and security clearances (pages 140 to 172):

As I have occasionally commented, for the vast majority of applicants these clearances have little or NO impact on how the application proceeds through the process . . . all the attention given to these in some topics here is largely misplaced. That said, while that is still largely my view, the data might suggest that, in contrast, there could be a significant number of applications waiting on the individual applicant's Security clearance. Caveat: this data is difficult to interpret.

 

[MrChazz]

Data is good. Information is good. Sharing is good. Much appreciated.

Perhaps I should qualify, getting data and information is good. And I expect and hope this is also good data. Relying on the integrity of IRCC is, for the most part, warranted, but some here tend to challenge or outright dismiss information coming from IRCC.

Not all the information provided is data. Beyond the data there is illuminating stuff, here and there, in this material. The outline of the process on page 196 (of the pdf file), for example, helps affirm what we know about the "steps" taken in processing grant citizenship applications. Comparison with the seven steps that take place in the local office, as listed on page 213 (despite redactions), helps to further illuminate how the process actually works. Another view of workflow or steps in processing is on page 252. There is also the table about time allocated for the various steps, which similarly illuminates information about the particular steps in the process, beginning on page 257. Of course these outlines need to be viewed and understood in context with other information and what we otherwise know about how things actually work.

Some take the particular steps in the process for granted, but many queries and misguided commentaries in the forum obviously are rooted in either not knowing or misunderstanding the process. It always helps to get more information reinforcing or correcting what we already know about how the process actually works.

The allocation of time (again, see table beginning on page 257) is illuminating. Actual time spent "processing" an individual's citizenship application appears to TOTAL, on an average, barely two hours plus a bit. And knowing how averages work (compared, say, to the median), this indicates that IRCC personnel spend significantly less than a total of two hours on the majority of applications. As I have often emphasized, the vast, vast majority of time applications are merely sitting in queue waiting for the next step . . . so it takes a year to 18 months (and more for too many) for personnel at IRCC to spend a total of less than two hours dealing with the application.

All this comes with a big CAUTION . . . apart from the statistical reports, these are COPIES of documents which are not necessarily operative information. Many of the included copies are documents about assessments or projections or strategies or recommendations. Nonetheless, among the more interesting aspects addressed is the prospect of knowledge of Canada testing potentially migrating to online testing permanently, not just as a temporary measure during the Pandemic, and centralizing that.

Back to the data: there are three salient, overriding observations:

-- as of September 11, 2021 there were over 400k applications in process, an absolutely staggering number

-- rate of applications reaching a disposition (meaning, mostly, the grant of citizenship) have been improving significantly during the year, but

-- IRCC continues to fall further and further behind

Some Particular, Distinguishing Data Points:

Data shows big swings . . . for GTA offices applications resolved (vast majority are grants of citizenship, some refusals, some other dispositions) week of August 15 to 21, 2021, total resolved is 2155, while during the week September 5 to 11, 2021, total was just 819
page 131

Compare that to the best week for the GTA from December 6, 2020 to Jan 2, 2021, which was the week December 13 to December 19, 2020, which saw final dispositions in just 120 cases that week. There was a total of just 371 for the GTA for the entire month (four weeks). (page 61)

Note that the GTA had 108,859 applications in process as of September 11, 2021 compared to 84,697 as of January 3, 2021 . . . illustrating that during this year IRCC continue to fall further and further behind at an rapid, depressing, and it needs to be said, unacceptable rate. (pages 132 and 62)

Likewise note that all the Western region, all the offices from Winnipeg to BC, had 113,143 applications in process as of September 11, 2021 compared to 87,411 as of January 3, 2021 . . . not falling behind at the same rate as offices in the GTA, but still very much too much in the wrong direction. (pages 132 and 62)

There are many comparisons worth examining and interpreting. Compare, for one isolated example

-- the number of test ready applications as of September 11, 2021:​

-- -- Vancouver Office 7,008 and for all Western offices in total, 32,730​

​

-- the number of "Under Review" (post-test mostly I believe) as of September 11, 2021:​

-- -- Vancouver Office 5,578 and for all Western offices in total, 37,332​

​

-- ceremony ready compared to scheduled:​

-- -- Vancouver Office 3,699/766 and for all Western offices in total, 16,316/2,647​

And compare that with the numbers as of January 3, 2021

-- the number of test ready applications as of January 3, 2021:​

-- -- Vancouver Office 7,684 and for all Western offices in total, 28,981​

​

-- the number of "Under Review" (post-test mostly I believe) as of January 3, 2021:​

-- -- Vancouver Office 3,821 and for all Western offices in total, 19,345​

​

-- ceremony ready compared to scheduled:​

-- -- Vancouver Office 311/40 and for all Western offices in total, 1,386/153​

Odds and ends
-- "Around 50% of clients in the testing inventory require a program integrity interview" (page 136). Note that under pre-covid procedures, ALL adult applicants were subject to the PI interview. The PI interview, by the way, is repeatedly referenced as a "choking" point, a step in the process which is a bottleneck significantly slowing processing down.


Note regarding data about criminality and security clearances (pages 140 to 172):

As I have occasionally commented, for the vast majority of applicants these clearances have little or NO impact on how the application proceeds through the process . . . all the attention given to these in some topics here is largely misplaced. That said, while that is still largely my view, the data might suggest that, in contrast, there could be a significant number of applications waiting on the individual applicant's Security clearance. Caveat: this data is difficult to interpret.

"Not all the information provided is data." HUH?

Please take a look at typical definitions

Data Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster

DATA | meaning in the Cambridge English Dictionary

 

[omarnabsws]

"Not all the information provided is data." HUH?

Please take a look at typical definitions

Data Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster

DATA | meaning in the Cambridge English Dictionary

Not all information is useful data

 

[Parnian1988]

Alright folks, after going back and forth with them, I have finally received the IRCC corporate records pertaining to the citizenship program. I believe this file contains data up until August 25th, 2021.

Here's the link to the file =>

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1aCg_6UPD2gIHto33Vhz6RM1EQ_L4dYnu/view?usp=sharing

Good luck!

Where did you get this? An amazingly insightful document. Shows how slow the Scarborough office is. They have given so many invitations for the test (average 5000 a month), yet consistently grant to only approx 200 people per month. Disgustingly slow.

 

[rajkamalmohanram]

Where did you get this? An amazingly insightful document. Shows how slow the Scarborough office is. They have given so many invitations for the test (average 5000 a month), yet consistently grant to only approx 200 people per month. Disgustingly slow.

Ordered IRCC Corporate records via the Access to Information Act.

 

[armoured]

Alright folks, after going back and forth with them, I have finally received the IRCC corporate records pertaining to the citizenship program. I believe this file contains data up until August 25th, 2021.

Tremendous work, and congratulations.

I'm interested in looking at some ATIP requests (i.e. not the personal records, but corporate as you've done). Do you have some examples (or references to samples) of how to do these and some successful ones?

DM if that's more appropriate.

 

[CaBeaver]

A new article about IRCC incompetency. CTV seems to have helped the people they inquired about their files on their behalf. I wish CTV could do a general help to the rest of us who are stuck. Next time IRCC posts anything, let's tag CTV news @CTVMontreal.

 

[rajkamalmohanram]

Tremendous work, and congratulations.

I'm interested in looking at some ATIP requests (i.e. not the personal records, but corporate as you've done). Do you have some examples (or references to samples) of how to do these and some successful ones?

DM if that's more appropriate.

Corporate records are always requested under the Access to Privacy Act (paying $5). We can't request them via Privacy Act.

1. Visit https://atip-aiprp.apps.gc.ca/atip/welcome.do
2. Fill out the information
3. Where it asks "Are you requesting information on your own behalf?", say "Yes".
4. On the next page, choose "Access to Information Act"
5. Where it asks "Which type of records do you wish to request?", choose "Corporate Records".

Now comes the tricky part, formulating the request. From my experience, IRCC will NOT take questions. For instance, they won't accept the request in the format "How is IRCC dealing with the current humongous backlog". Instead, you can try something like this :

"Please provide any and all records including but not limited to memos, briefing notes, internal notes, reports, discussions, emails, policies pertaining to ALL of the following for timeline between Jan 01, 2021 till the date this request is processed :

1. Plans / discussions about fixing the current backlog.
2. XXX
3. YYY
"


I've successfully done it twice so far. Below are the corporate records that I obtained.

IRCC Corporate Records - Citizenship Program (Received on May 3rd 2021) => I think this contains data from the inception of the online testing/online oath process until Jan/Feb 2021.
IRCC Corporate Records - Citizenship Program (Received on Jan 5th, 2022) => This contains data from Jan 2021 to August 25th, 2021.

Please see the following posts to see how I got started with it and the format of the requests I've sent them.

First attempt - FAILED - Posted questions instead of requesting information
Second attempt - PASS - Requested information from the inception of the online test/oath program until Jan 2021
Third attempt - PASS - Requested information from Jan 2021 till August 2021

 

[dpenabill]

IRCC Corporate Records - Citizenship Program (Received on Jan 5th, 2022) => This contains data from Jan 2021 to August 25th, 2021.

Actually it contains a significant amount of data at least from December 6, 2020 to September 11, 2021, as I previously referenced, and notwithstanding the terms of the request.

Your explanation and description of the "tricky part" warrants a lot of emphasis.

I'm interested in looking at some ATIP requests (i.e. not the personal records, but corporate as you've done). Do you have some examples (or references to samples) of how to do these and some successful ones?

An Overview:

As @rajkamalmohanram noted, there is a difference between requests for information based on

-- the Access to Information Act (see https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/A-1/ ), versus​

-- the Privacy Act (see https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/P-21/ )​

"Corporate records" are obtained pursuant to the Access to Information Act. Any Canadian can request these. There are restrictions on access, such as rules limiting access to certain types of records and some provisions as to information for which public disclosure is outright prohibited (ranging from secret or confidential information, to personal information). I am not certain if the nomenclature is still used the same way, but generally these types of requests have been referred to as "ATI requests" or "ATI applications."

Personal information, in contrast, is primarily obtained pursuant to the Privacy Act. These have generally been referred to as "ATIP requests" or "ATIP applications," but I have also seen some government information referring to these as "Personal Information Requests." Access to this information is subject to some of the same restrictions as ATI applications, but more significantly who can obtain access to personal information or personal records is very limited, EVEN within the government itself, and even within a particular government agency or department. Thus, for example, not just any IRCC official can open the file containing a citizenship applicant's records, let alone an official with Canada Revenue.

This is discussed and more fully explained at the government web page titled "Make an access to information or personal information request" here: https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury-board-secretariat/services/access-information-privacy/access-information/request-information.html
This web page includes links to more information and to forms for both ATI requests and ATIP requests. (See, for example, drop down to "Step 3. Fill in the Form" under section titled "Make a request by mail or email").

Making ATI Requests:

Composing the ATI Request which will generate a response containing the documents and information the individual is actually looking for can be difficult. It typically requires doing real homework. Some trial and error is common, as @rajkamalmohanram experienced, also noting "the tricky part," which, again, deserves much emphasis.

There are multiple government page pages which will link to the online form for ATI requests (as there are for ATIP requests as well). One page where the form for the ATI request is available, in multiple formats, is here: https://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/tbsf-fsct/350-57-eng.asp
(again, the ATI request is different from the ATIP requests commonly discussed in relation to GCMS obtained through those requests)

SAMPLES of ATI Requests Made by Others:

Actually, more than just samples are easily obtained: completed requests are available to any Canadian. There is no charge to obtain a copy of a completed request (but there is a waiting or processing time, as always eh).

The government allows public access to a searchable database populated with summaries for each completed request, for all completed requests (within a time period, at least two years as best I recall). On that web page I referenced above, titled "Make an access to information or personal information request" here: https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury-board-secretariat/services/access-information-privacy/access-information/request-information.html
there are links facilitating this, but here is a direct page https://open.canada.ca/en/search/ati which is a list of thousands of summaries of completed requests (more samples than you could read in . . . well, a lot longer than it would be worth) which has a search function. Note the reference number for each entry; if the summary indicates information you are interested in, the ref# is a link to a form for requesting a copy of the government's response to that request. There is no charge.

EXAMPLE:
search terms: [citizenship applications backlog]
search results consisting of 12 records should be here: https://open.canada.ca/en/search/ati?search_api_fulltext=citizenship+applications+backlog&sort_by=year&sort_order=DESC (assuming this url works; if not, it is easy to replicate the search)

Two of those twelve records are the results for the requests made by @rajkamalmohanram as shared here: Req # 2A-2021-65210 and Req # 2A-2020-81634

The others are mostly examples of poorly composed requests, although it may be worth seeing the response for Req # 2A-2021-39203

The government's database entry for the more recent request by @rajkamalmohanram Req # 2A-2021-65210 describing the request (which I assume is largely the language of the request itself) is here: https://open.canada.ca/en/search/ati/reference/8dbd4f86ff814d6a8bf9faad1c61f5a1 (if this url works)

and looks like this:

Organization: Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada​

Year: 2021​

Month: November​

Request Number: 2A-2021-65210​

Request Summary: Please provide any and all records including but not limited to memos, briefing notes, internal notes, reports, discussions, emails, policies pertaining to ALL of the following for timeline between Jan 01, 2021 till the date this request is processed, August 25, 2021 : 1. The total number of applicants invited for the online testing for the timeline mentioned above. 2. The total number of applicants invited for the virtual / in-person oath ceremonies for the timeline mentioned above. 3. The total number of applications in backlog categorized as follows : Applicants awaiting Background checks to be complete, Applicants awaiting a test invite and Applicants awaiting oath invitation for the timeline mentioned above. 4. The total number of "Decision Made" status issued for applicants for the timeline mentioned above. 5. Plans and measures being pursued to minimize backlog for applicants waiting for the online citizenship test AND virtual oath ceremony. 6. Increasing the number of online oath ceremonies and/or increasing the number of participants per ceremony (including holding in-person and online testing in parallel to maximize efficiency​

Disposition: Disclosed in part​

Number of pages: 264​

That is followed by the fillable form for obtaining a copy of the results, which can be immediately submitted, again no fee; however, fortunately for us, @rajkamalmohanram shared the results here, so no need to ask the government or wait for the results.

In any event, the searchable database of completed request summaries has thousands of request samples. And, one might even be able to find additional completed requests that would be of interest to members of this forum. But that tends to be some real work (I certainly have NOT been keeping up). Which again brings up how fortunate we are that @rajkamalmohanram more or less delivered this information to us.


Edit to Add and Emphasize that the public's access to completed requests is for ATI requests NOT ATIP requests. While access to personal information (ATIP requests) is not exclusively limited to the person himself or herself, the Privacy Act is actually mostly about protecting privacy and restricting access to personal information, and the provisions governing an individual's access (or access by a representative of the individual) to their own information is just a part of the Act. Generally, personal information must not be disclosed to the public. In contrast, requests for government information generally, obtained through the ATI process, generates responses of information that is more or less considered "public information," information for which the general public has a general statutory right (actually a "privilege," not a "right" as such but rather an entitlement under statute, for those picky about precise legal terms).

 

[dpenabill]

Not all information is useful data

Note, not all information is data. If it is not data, it is of course not useful data. But it may nonetheless be useful information.

As I previously noted, for example, the ATI response shared by @rajkamalmohanram includes information that is not "data" (not figures, numbers, statistics, or otherwise the kind of information that can be processed) but which is illuminating information and at least for some potentially useful. I previously referenced some of that information in this ATI-response, like the work flow charts illustrating particular steps in processing a citizenship application (for me, that information is especially helpful since much of my activity here is oriented to questions about the procedure). A better example, however, might be the information in this ATI response regarding taking the oath and related formalities in the procedures attendant becoming a citizen, on pages 7 to 13. Perhaps only a few have questions that information answers, but now in addition to anecdotal reporting about what happens attendant the oath ceremony and particular details, like the completion of oath form (which includes not just the affirmation of taking the oath but also the individual's affirmation they have not been subject to any criminal or immigration proceedings potentially constituting a prohibition), for those answering questions about the oath ceremony, we now also have this information as a source, a significantly more reliable source than anecdotal reporting, and significantly more detailed than the typical anecdotal report.

That said, sure, there is also quite a bit of information and data in this ATI-response which is not particularly interesting and not very useful, at least for purposes related to the discussion here. That's typical in the ATI process. It is not easy, and it requires doing the homework, to compose a request that will generate a response that contains much useful information and data, and to get that it is usually necessary to make a fairly broad request that will also result in getting additional information beyond that which is of much interest or use.

The usefulness of the data itself, provided in this ATI-response, is relative. Much of it mostly addresses questions rooted more in curiosity than functional decision-making. But it also offers context and an overview of what has been happening . . . more specifically during the period of December 2020 through mid September 2021, and from that there is plenty that helps us get a better grasp of the situation and a picture of the progress being made, which is a mixed bag: plenty of signs of progress, which is critical and almost all of us want (even if we are not personally affected), but more than a few signs of how slow that has been coming and how far shy of acceptable it has been and in too many ways continues to be. As I previously noted, more than 400k applications in inventory is, well, unmistakably a serious issue.

If your comment was intended to dismiss the value of the information obtained by these ATI requests, the aim was off.

"Not all the information provided is data." HUH?
Please take a look at typical definitions

Not at all sure what in my post confused you.

If you are concerned I misunderstand the relationship and differences between information and a subgroup (type) of information typically referred to as "data," rest assured, I think I've got the gist of it covered, along with navigating other types of information like guidelines, instructions, directions, strategies, and noting there are examples of all these kinds of information (that is different from data) in the contents of this ATI response. This is NOT to attest to my competency in statistical analysis; I tend to be limited to the more basic level of the basics, little more than correlating numbers to discern simple trends, mostly limited to observing what increases or decreases, although I at least have some grasp of the difference between averages and medians, and how importantly that affects things, at least somewhat. But yeah, I recognize the difference between information generally compared to collected numbers, statistics, lists of facts or details, and such that make up data. Got it.

 

[omarnabsws]

Note, not all information is data. If it is not data, it is of course not useful data. But it may nonetheless be useful information.

As I previously noted, for example, the ATI response shared by @rajkamalmohanram includes information that is not "data" (not figures, numbers, statistics, or otherwise the kind of information that can be processed) but which is illuminating information and at least for some potentially useful. I previously referenced some of that information in this ATI-response, like the work flow charts illustrating particular steps in processing a citizenship application (for me, that information is especially helpful since much of my activity here is oriented to questions about the procedure). A better example, however, might be the information in this ATI response regarding taking the oath and related formalities in the procedures attendant becoming a citizen, on pages 7 to 13. Perhaps only a few have questions that information answers, but now in addition to anecdotal reporting about what happens attendant the oath ceremony and particular details, like the completion of oath form (which includes not just the affirmation of taking the oath but also the individual's affirmation they have not been subject to any criminal or immigration proceedings potentially constituting a prohibition), for those answering questions about the oath ceremony, we now also have this information as a source, a significantly more reliable source than anecdotal reporting, and significantly more detailed than the typical anecdotal report.

That said, sure, there is also quite a bit of information and data in this ATI-response which is not particularly interesting and not very useful, at least for purposes related to the discussion here. That's typical in the ATI process. It is not easy, and it requires doing the homework, to compose a request that will generate a response that contains much useful information and data, and to get that it is usually necessary to make a fairly broad request that will also result in getting additional information beyond that which is of much interest or use.

The usefulness of the data itself, provided in this ATI-response, is relative. Much of it mostly addresses questions rooted more in curiosity than functional decision-making. But it also offers context and an overview of what has been happening . . . more specifically during the period of December 2020 through mid September 2021, and from that there is plenty that helps us get a better grasp of the situation and a picture of the progress being made, which is a mixed bag: plenty of signs of progress, which is critical and almost all of us want (even if we are not personally affected), but more than a few signs of how slow that has been coming and how far shy of acceptable it has been and in too many ways continues to be. As I previously noted, more than 400k applications in inventory is, well, unmistakably a serious issue.

If your comment was intended to dismiss the value of the information obtained by these ATI requests, the aim was off.



Not at all sure what in my post confused you.

If you are concerned I misunderstand the relationship and differences between information and a subgroup (type) of information typically referred to as "data," rest assured, I think I've got the gist of it covered, along with navigating other types of information like guidelines, instructions, directions, strategies, and noting there are examples of all these kinds of information (that is different from data) in the contents of this ATI response. This is NOT to attest to my competency in statistical analysis; I tend to be limited to the more basic level of the basics, little more than correlating numbers to discern simple trends, mostly limited to observing what increases or decreases, although I at least have some grasp of the difference between averages and medians, and how importantly that affects things, at least somewhat. But yeah, I recognize the difference between information generally compared to collected numbers, statistics, lists of facts or details, and such that make up data. Got it.

I was replying to someone who was just concerned with whether the technical definition of information is data or not. That's the extent of it lol

 

[MrChazz]

Note, not all information is data. If it is not data, it is of course not useful data. But it may nonetheless be useful information.

As I previously noted, for example, the ATI response shared by @rajkamalmohanram includes information that is not "data" (not figures, numbers, statistics, or otherwise the kind of information that can be processed) but which is illuminating information and at least for some potentially useful. I previously referenced some of that information in this ATI-response, like the work flow charts illustrating particular steps in processing a citizenship application (for me, that information is especially helpful since much of my activity here is oriented to questions about the procedure). A better example, however, might be the information in this ATI response regarding taking the oath and related formalities in the procedures attendant becoming a citizen, on pages 7 to 13. Perhaps only a few have questions that information answers, but now in addition to anecdotal reporting about what happens attendant the oath ceremony and particular details, like the completion of oath form (which includes not just the affirmation of taking the oath but also the individual's affirmation they have not been subject to any criminal or immigration proceedings potentially constituting a prohibition), for those answering questions about the oath ceremony, we now also have this information as a source, a significantly more reliable source than anecdotal reporting, and significantly more detailed than the typical anecdotal report.

That said, sure, there is also quite a bit of information and data in this ATI-response which is not particularly interesting and not very useful, at least for purposes related to the discussion here. That's typical in the ATI process. It is not easy, and it requires doing the homework, to compose a request that will generate a response that contains much useful information and data, and to get that it is usually necessary to make a fairly broad request that will also result in getting additional information beyond that which is of much interest or use.

The usefulness of the data itself, provided in this ATI-response, is relative. Much of it mostly addresses questions rooted more in curiosity than functional decision-making. But it also offers context and an overview of what has been happening . . . more specifically during the period of December 2020 through mid September 2021, and from that there is plenty that helps us get a better grasp of the situation and a picture of the progress being made, which is a mixed bag: plenty of signs of progress, which is critical and almost all of us want (even if we are not personally affected), but more than a few signs of how slow that has been coming and how far shy of acceptable it has been and in too many ways continues to be. As I previously noted, more than 400k applications in inventory is, well, unmistakably a serious issue.

If your comment was intended to dismiss the value of the information obtained by these ATI requests, the aim was off.



Not at all sure what in my post confused you.

If you are concerned I misunderstand the relationship and differences between information and a subgroup (type) of information typically referred to as "data," rest assured, I think I've got the gist of it covered, along with navigating other types of information like guidelines, instructions, directions, strategies, and noting there are examples of all these kinds of information (that is different from data) in the contents of this ATI response. This is NOT to attest to my competency in statistical analysis; I tend to be limited to the more basic level of the basics, little more than correlating numbers to discern simple trends, mostly limited to observing what increases or decreases, although I at least have some grasp of the difference between averages and medians, and how importantly that affects things, at least somewhat. But yeah, I recognize the difference between information generally compared to collected numbers, statistics, lists of facts or details, and such that make up data. Got it.

Here are standard definitions at those links:

(A) Essential Meaning of data
1: facts or information used usually to calculate, analyze, or plan something

2: information that is produced or stored by a computer

(B) data: information, especially facts or numbers, collected to be examined and considered and used to help decision-making, or information in an electronic form that can be stored and used by a computer:

It certainly does look like what we got was information stored on a computer, i.e. data

 

[freediagram]

Thanks, @rajkamalmohanram for your effort and the document.

I just reviewed it briefly and I am just really depressed and at my wit's end with IRCC. I applied in April 2019, I made calls to IRCC and my MP, requested notes, sent emails and begged, and finally took the test in September 2021 and was requested PP companies afterward; radio silence ever since.

Considering the new lockdown in Ontario and all the difficulty they mention with respect to accessing paper files and the challenges employees face with IRCC work from home system, and the completion ratio numbers, the ever-increasing backlog, and IRCC's emphasis on KPIs in the document, I don't see light at the end of the tunnel. This is not an exaggeration. I really feel it's likely that I will not have received my citizenship this time next year.

What to do? really - what to do? who to talk to? The balance of power in this case is heavily tilted toward IRCC. Applicants are afraid to speak up and organize, fearing retaliation and even more (is it even possible?) delays and as soon as one receives their citizenship, they say "good riddance" and don't want to even think about the torture they went through - rightfully so.

 

[Bains87]

Thanks, @rajkamalmohanram for your effort and the document.

I just reviewed it briefly and I am just really depressed and at my wit's end with IRCC. I applied in April 2019, I made calls to IRCC and my MP, requested notes, sent emails and begged, and finally took the test in September 2021 and was requested PP companies afterward; radio silence ever since.

Considering the new lockdown in Ontario and all the difficulty they mention with respect to accessing paper files and the challenges employees face with IRCC work from home system, and the completion ratio numbers, the ever-increasing backlog, and IRCC's emphasis on KPIs in the document, I don't see light at the end of the tunnel. This is not an exaggeration. I really feel it's likely that I will not have received my citizenship this time next year.

What to do? really - what to do? who to talk to?

I just talked to an agent and she just kept repeating the same thing about delays, COVID, crises etc., it seems there isn't much we can do, unless the media gets involved, I think everyone should just write emails to the journalists and ask them to write articles about people who are stuck since 2019. Seems like once the articles are published the people who are mentioned in the article do get prioritized and they receive their citizenship pretty quickly, which makes me think that the officers just look at the file when someone makes enough noise.