Federal Skilled Worker (FSW) Applications – Procedures for Visa Offices
Purpose
This operational bulletin provides visa officers with additional guidance on making final determinations of eligibility for processing of federal skilled worker (FSW) files referred from the Centralized Intake Office (CIO) in Sydney.
Background
The Action Plan for Faster Immigration of November 28, 2008 includes Ministerial Instructions (MI) outlining a set of eligibility criteria applying to all new FSW applications received on or after February 27, 2008. The MI enables CIC to keep the federal skilled worker backlog from growing, to reduce wait times and to assess new applications according to Canada’s labour market needs.
CIC has committed to processing eligible applications on a priority basis, with a processing time objective of 6 to 12 months.
In order to meet the goals of the Action Plan, especially the processing time commitments, deadlines must be clear and respected.
Basic procedural framework
The success of the Action Plan depends on the CIO and visa offices applying the following procedures consistently.
The CIO receives all FSW applications.
The CIO either:
determines an application is ineligible according to the MI for processing, informs the applicant to this effect, refunds the fee(s) and closes the file; OR
informs the applicant a visa officer will make a final determination of eligibility for processing on the basis of the information and documents the applicant submits along with a complete application to the visa office within a 120 deadline; and
transfers the electronic file to the visa office for final determination of eligibility for processing against the MI.
The visa office must:
regularly produce bring forward (BF) reports (as described in OB 089 of December 2, 2008), as frequently as necessary to ensure the final determination of eligibility for processing happens within 2 weeks of the BF date set by the CIO.
Issues
Subsequent to receiving the referral from the CIO, visa offices will face the following issues:
Requests for extensions
Applicants who do not submit anything within the deadline
Incomplete applications
Submission of application/documents after a final determination of eligibility for processing has been made
Counting negative final determinations of eligibility for processing at visa offices
CAIPS PSDEC coding
Final determination of eligibility for processing and processing
A) Requests for extensions
The FSW application kit [IMM EG7000] informs applicants “visa offices are strictly enforcing the 120 day rule and will not provide extensions.” In addition, applicants are informed clearly and unambiguously of the documentary requirements and the timeframes for submissions to the visa office. The FSW kit states:
Consult the Visa Office specific requirements now to determine what documents you will need to provide ... If you are not prepared to submit full documentation to the Visa Office within 120 days do not apply now.
Applicants are given notice from the outset that if they are not prepared, they should not apply. Applicants who follow this notice should be able to meet the deadline.
The IMM EG7000 is available at the following link:
www.cic.gc.ca/english/information/applications/
guides/EG73.asp
Nevertheless, some applicants will request extensions. All requests must be properly considered, documented in CAIPS notes and answered. Visa officers must bear in mind, however, the importance of the 120 day deadline in order to manage these cases efficiently.
B) Applicants who do not submit anything within the deadline
The CIO informs applicants that a visa officer will make the final determination of eligibility for processing on the basis of the information on file once the 120 days has elapsed. Visa offices are not required to remind applicants of this deadline.
Visa officers will make a final determination of eligibility for processing on the basis of the information on file (electronic file). Without a complete application and supporting documents, the officer is unlikely to be satisfied the applicant meets the requirements of the MI.
Visa officers should be able to make final determinations quickly in the absence of any submission.
Enter CAIPS notes: The notes should clearly state the final determination of eligibility was made based on the information available. Visa officers must enter notes to this effect (see suggested wording below):
The CIO informed the applicant he/she had 120 s to submit a complete application with supporting documents to this office. The CIO also informed the applicant a final determination of whether the application can be placed into processing according to the Ministerial Instructions of November 28, 2008, would be made at this office based on the available information as of the 120 day deadline. The applicant has not submitted a complete application and supporting documents. I have reviewed the available information and am not satisfied there is sufficient evidence this application is eligible for processing.
The letter in Appendix A to this bulletin should be sent to applicants who do not submit a complete application and supporting documents, and who receive a negative final determination. As no paper file exists, please copy and paste the letter into CAIPS notes.
C) Incomplete applications
Applicants are expected to submit a complete application including supporting documents identified in the visa office specific kit. However, submissions will vary in quality and completeness. Procedures for the most common scenarios visa offices may encounter are outlined below:
The R10 completeness check has already been done at the CIO: Although applicants must submit an application to the CIO and (if referred to a visa office for a final determination of eligibility for processing), a copy of the application to the visa office, this is one application for permanent residence and the R10 check is only done once.
The visa office will receive and assess the applicant’s submission as-is: Visa officers should proceed directly to a final determination of eligibility against the MI. If the application is determined to be eligible for processing, the case should proceed directly to a selection decision based on the information on file.
Insufficient evidence of meeting Ministerial Instructions: Visa officers will assess the application on the basis of the information on file. If the applicant’s submission is insufficient to determine that the application is eligible for processing, a negative determination of eligibility should be rendered.
The sample letter in Appendix D of OP 6 should be sent to applicants who receive a negative final determination of eligibility for processing based on what they submitted within the 120 day deadline.
Missing SELDEC documents: Visa officers will complete the final determination of eligibility on the basis of the information on file. If the application is eligible for processing, visa officers will complete the selection review based on the evidence presented. No follow-up request for the missing document is required.
Exception: Section 10.10 of OP 6 states that applicants who submit other evidence in writing that satisfies a visa officer that the applicant demonstrates language proficiency of at least Canadian Language Benchmarks (CLB) 2000 benchmark 4 but not the proficiency levels claimed, should be given the opportunity to provide conclusive evidence. Visa officers should proceed in accordance with procedures outlined in section 10.10 of OP 6. Please note though, that if the other evidence in writing only satisfies a visa officer that the applicant has demonstrated language proficiency corresponding to the CLB 2000 benchmark 3, there is no requirement to invite the applicant to produce conclusive evidence.
Missing documents / information related to admissibility: Any documents or information required to complete the admissibility review should be requested once SELDEC is passed. Missing admissibility documents should not hold up the final determination of eligibility or selection review.
D) Submission of application/documents after final determination of eligibility is complete
After a negative final determination of eligibility, the file is closed. A negative determination is final as of the date of the letter informing the applicant of the negative determination. Applicants who submit anything after such a letter has been sent should be informed that they may submit a new application to the CIO.
Note: Any documents received prior to the date of the letter, regardless of whether or not the 120 days have elapsed, must be considered. Visa offices cannot refuse to consider submissions made after 120 days, if the letters in either Appendix A of this bulletin or Appendix D of OP 6 have not been sent. Therefore, it is important to produce the BF reports, make the final determination of eligibility and send the negative determination of eligibility for processing letters promptly.
E) Counting negative final determinations of eligibility for processing at visa offices
It is essential to follow the instructions below in order to distinguish between cases in which complete applications and supporting documents are received and cases in which they are not. It is necessary to make this distinction for reporting and evaluation purposes.
If the applicant does not submit anything, do not replace the CIO file number with a visa office file number. Re-open the CAIPS file to record the final determination according to the instructions in “Information about CAIPS release 40.2” of February 2, 2009 (Appendix B).
If the applicant submits a complete application and supporting documents, replace the CIO file number with a visa office file number. See “Information about CAIPS release 40.2” of February 2, 2009 (Appendix B).
F) CAIPS PSDEC coding
Note: All previous instructions to use PSDEC code 3 are revoked. Use PSDEC code 2 for all negative eligibility determinations, i.e., for applicants who receive either the letter in Appendix A to this OB or the letter in Appendix D of OP 6.
For refund procedures at the CIO see Appendix C.
PSDEC 1: Eligible
PSDEC 2: Ineligible (negative final determination)
PSDEC 3: Withdrawn (applicant withdraws)
PSDEC 4: Administrative Withdrawal (recommended for further assessment at visa office – for the exclusive use of the CIO)
G) Final determination of eligibility for processing and processing
All visa offices should use the same approach when making a final determination of eligibility.
Where documents are reliable and information is clear, consistent and well-supported the final determination of eligibility can be made quickly. Where this is not the case, the final determination of eligibility will be more involved.
While visa officers must exercise diligence at the final determination stage, they should also complete this stage quickly, i.e. ideally less than two weeks after the 120 day BF date set by the CIO.
Exercising diligence while making a final determination within the ideal timeframe means the determination will be a paper review of the application and supporting documents. Visa officers must apply their local knowledge to the application and documents to determine eligibility.
The paper review is not just a confirmation of the preliminary determination made at the CIO. The CIO makes preliminary determinations without the benefit of the complete applications and supporting documents. The availability of this information permits a more robust assessment at the visa office.
For SW1 (one of the 38 occupations listed in the MI), review the documents related to work experience. These documents should include those listed in the Appendix A document checklist of the visa office specific forms. They should include sufficient detail to support the claim of one year of continuous work experience or equivalent paid work experience in the occupation in the last 10 years. Documents lacking sufficient information about the employer or, containing only vague descriptions of duties and periods of employment, should be given less weight. Descriptions of duties taken verbatim from the NOC should be regarded as self-serving. Presented with such documents, visa officers may question whether they accurately describe an applicant’s experience. A document that lacks sufficient detail to permit eventual verification and a credible description of the applicant’s experience is unlikely to satisfy an officer of an applicant’s eligibility.
For SW2 (arranged employment offer) proof of the arranged employment offer (AEO) must be included in the application. The AEO should be sufficiently detailed to support the claim that an offer of employment has been made to the applicant on an indeterminate basis. The AEO should include the employer’s name, address, phone number, any other contact information. If the applicant has a permanent job offer confirmed by Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (HRSDC)/Service Canada, a photocopy of the confirmation which was sent to the employer should also be included. Visa officers should be able to use tools such as on-line directories or open source materials to confirm the existence of the employer. The visa officer should corroborate the information about the employer with any NESS employment validations that might exist in CAIPS.
Note: Not all AEOs will have corresponding NESS employment validations.
For SW3 (temporary foreign workers and international students legally in Canada for at least one year): supporting documents should be sufficiently detailed to establish that applicants have been working or studying for the required period with legal status. Documents may include work or study permits (neither are mandatory), a letter of employment or proof of enrolment at an educational institution. Letters from employers or schools should include the name of the employer or school, address and phone number. Visa officers should be able to use tools such as on-line directories or open source materials to confirm the existence of the employer or school. FOSS can also be checked to corroborate statements about legal residence in Canada.
Note: It may not be possible to verify all temporary foreign workers and international students in FOSS.
Visa officers may also check previous applications to corroborate any information provided in the FSW application. Applications more than 12 months old, however, will not include the most recent information about work experience.
After a positive final determination of eligibility at the visa office the applicant is no longer eligible for a refund.
Processing
Visa officers are also required to approve or refuse FSW applications according to the requirements of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) and the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations (IRPR).
In cases of refusals, this means an applicant fails to meet the minimal requirements, is not awarded sufficient points or is found to be inadmissible. As applicants may specify more than one NOC code in their application, failure to meet the minimal requirements for an occupation on the MI list will not necessarily result in refusal.
Interviews, verifications of the authenticity of documents, site visits, investigations or seeking clarification from applicants constitute processing. These activities may be undertaken to determine if applicants meet the minimal requirements, can be awarded points for the selection criteria or are inadmissible.
Finding inadmissibility for misrepresentation involves a relatively high standard of procedural fairness. In addition, only an operations manager, deputy program manager or immigration program manager may refuse for misrepresentation.
Appendix A – Negative Determination of Eligibility for Processing – Incomplete Application– Sample letter
Centralized Intake Office file number:
Dear Madam/Sir:
This refers to your application for permanent residence in Canada in the Federal Skilled Worker class.
The Centralized Intake Office (CIO) in Sydney, Nova Scotia, informed you on [enter date] that you had 120 s from that date to submit a complete application, with all required forms and supporting documents, to our office. You were also informed that if you did not do so within the 120 deadline, we would complete the eligibility determination on the basis of the information on file.
To date, you have not provided a complete application and supporting documents. I have determined your eligibility on the basis of the information on file. I am not satisfied there is sufficient evidence you are eligible, according to the Ministerial Instructions, to have your application placed into processing. This negative determination of eligibility for processing is final and your file has been closed.
The application fee you paid is refundable. The CIO has been notified and you will receive a cheque from Canada within 8 to 12 weeks.
If you are interested in immigrating to Canada in the Federal Skilled Worker class in the future, a new application for permanent residence should be sent to the CIO along with a new application fee. Your application will be assessed against the requirements in effect at that time.
Thank you for your interest in Canada.
Immigration Section
Visa Office
[enter complete address of office, including fax number]
email
website
Appendix B – Additional information about CAIPS Release 40.2
The purpose of this message is to provide missions with background information and additional guidelines related to the implementation of CAIPS Release 40.2 (January 2009).
Please note that the CAIPS user guide – Permanent Residents was updated to reflect the changes in release 40.2. The following sections were updated:
Section 2: File Creation
Section 5: Paper-screening
File Management – section 2: Changing File Details
You may wish to consult the CAIPS user guide for additional technical details about the Release.
RELEASE 40.2 – WHAT’S NEW
At Centralized Intake Office (CIO): When the CIO creates a B-file in CAIPS, the system automatically populates the first X-REF field with the same CIO B-file number. The x-ref field then becomes locked and cannot be modified by the user.
At Visa Offices: When the Visa Office enters a FSW file created in Sydney, CAIPS prompts the user to change the file number from the CIO B-file number to a local B-file number. This is not compulsory – the user is not forced to change the file number. Changing the file number has the effect of “re-opening” the file, clearing it of all previously entered decisions. The CIO’s B-file number is retained and locked in XREF.
WHO DOES WHAT – FROM CIO-SYDNEY TO THE VISA OFFICE
The following section outlines the procedures that apply to the applications that the CIO recommends for processing.
PROCEDURES AT CENTRALIZED INTAKE OFFICE (CIO) – SYDNEY, NOVA SCOTIA:
Applicants applying under the Federal Skilled Worker category must submit their applications directly to the Centralized Intake Office (CIO) in Sydney.
The CIO reviews applications for completeness, recovers fees, creates files in CAIPS and assesses eligibility for processing under the Ministerial Instructions.
If the CIO determines the applicant may be eligible for processing, the applicant is sent a letter requesting that a full application and supporting documents be sent to the visa office within 120 s.
CIO enters the following information in the relevant CAIPS fields: PILOT=M01, PSDEC= 4, BFTO= A87,
BFdate = T+120, effectively closing the CIO’s CAIPS file.
At the beginning of each week, CIO electronically transfers all the applications recommended for processing the previous week to the appropriate visa offices. The CIO will send an email to the receiving office’s email address once the file transfer is complete. Given the volume of cases, it may take the CIO several days to complete all of its file transfers.
Once the file is transferred, the file is removed from the CIO’s IMMIG database and becomes a miscellaneous (MISC) record at the CIO.
CIO will check the status of the file transfers by checking their night job logs (report BATFTX.LPT)
PROCEDURES AT THE VISA OFFICE:
The files e-transferred from the CIO appear in the visa office’s night job report (BATFTM.LPT). Visa offices should verify that the night job report against the list of files provided by the CIO. Please note that the transferred files may appear at the visa office as late as Wednesday due to time zone differences.
The transferred files now form part of the IMMIG database in the receiving mission. Since they were transferred from the CIO with PSDEC 4, they are considered “closed” files and remain closed (with PSDEC=4) until the file is re-numbered or re-opened at the visa office.
Until the CAIPS file is accessed at the visa office, the LOC, BF and BFdate entered by the CIO are retained, allowing easy tracking of these files through CAIPS command mode. Visa offices should run overdue BF lists using BFTO= A87 to identify C‑50 files where the applicant has not complied with the request to submit a complete application and supporting documentation within 120 s.
IMPORTANT: The moment the B-file from the CIO is accessed or viewed at the visa office, the information in the LOC, BFTO, BFDATE fields entered by CIO will be overwritten with LOC= PA, BFTO= RET, BFDATE = T + 2 years, the default for closed files. This will occur even if NO changes are made to the data. The only exception is when the file is accessed through F12 – Case Summary screen. Therefore, it is best NOT to access the transferred file until you are ready to re-number or re-open the file.
WHEN TO RENUMBER THE B-FILE FROM THE CIO: FULL APPLICATION RECEIVED
Files transferred from the CIO for processing are only re-numbered if and when the applicant submits a full application.
Upon receipt of a full application and supporting documents, the visa office re-numbers the file to a local B-file number and enters its own PSDEC.
I. Re-number the file:
This is new functionality implemented in CAIPS Release 40.2. It permits the visa office to re-number files that have the following pre-conditions: IMMCAT = SW1 (Federal Skilled Worker), Pilot code = M01, originating from the CIO, with PSDEC = 4.
This function can only be accessed through the F6 – Immigrant Create / Edit / View screen. Users who try to access the file through F7 – Paperscreening will be prompted with the following message:
“C‑50 case originating in SYDNEYNS, FILE NUMBER must be renumbered at F6”
STEPS for re-numbering the file:
From the F6- Immigrant Create / Edit / View screen, visa office enters the B-file number assigned by the CIO to locate the file in CAIPS. The applicant will provide this B-file number when they submit their complete application.
CAIPS prompts user to change the file number:
“C50 case originating in SYDNEYNS, change FILE NUMBER? (Y/N)”
The user enters “Y”, which allows the user to overwrite the CIO file number with a local B-file number. Note that the first X-REF field is automatically populated with the original CIO file number. This field is locked and un-editable.
When a file is re-numbered, the PSDATE, screener and decision code previously entered at the CIO are cleared. The PSDEC is re-set to 0. CAIPS will automatically enter a note in the PF2 notes screen as follows:
***** 14/01/2009 ** C50 FILE NUMBER CHANGED FROM B001000020 TO B001000031 ****
=========== C50 – B001000031 CDB 14/JAN/2009================
*** IMPORTANT NOTE: CAIPS will prompt users to change the file number in F6 until either the file is re-numbered or re-opened. User may choose to re-open the file without going through the re-numbering process. HOWEVER, once the file is re-opened, CAIPS will not permit any changes to the file number.
II. Determine eligibility for processing (enter PSDEC):
Once the visa office reviews the applicant’s submission, the decision about eligibility for C‑50 processing is captured in the F7 Paperscreening screen with PSDECs 1 (eligible) and 2 (ineligible).
REMINDER: F7 – Paperscreening should only be used to capture decisions about eligibility for processing under the Ministerial Instructions, not whether the applicant meets Selection criteria.
WHEN TO RE-OPEN THE B-FILE FROM THE CIO
A. No application received – BF date has elapsed:
As outlined in OB 089, if the applicant does not submit a completed application within 120 days, the visa office will close the file. In this situation, the visa office will not re-number the CIO B-file number.
These files can be easily extracted through a CAIPS command mode query using BFTO = A87
with BFdate < current date.
STEPS:
In the F7 Paperscreening screen, enter the CIO B-file number.
CAIPS prompts user to return to F6 to re-number the file.
User opts to proceed without re-numbering the file and presses “enter” to continue. CAIPS asks if user wishes to re-open the file.
User re-opens the file and records a PSDEC = 3. (June 2009 – This instruction is revoked. Please record this as PSDEC = 2)
User records notes in CAIPS notes and sends the applicant a letter informing him that the file is closed.
Visa office sends email to CIO to initiate refund of processing fees.
B. Applicant withdraws the application
If the applicant submits a written request to withdraw the application, the visa office will re-open the file (as described in section A above) and enter PSDEC = 3 to close the file. The file is not re-numbered. Visa office sends the applicant an acknowledgement of withdrawal.
** ONE FINAL REMINDER: PILOT CODE = M01 **
Pilot code “M01” was implemented as part of CAIPS Release 40.1 (Nov 2008). The Pilot Code identifies which set of Ministerial Instructions apply to the case. To ensure accurate reporting and evaluation, pilot code M01 must be entered for all C‑50 FSW cases, whether the file is originally created at mission or at the CIO.
Missions will have created many C‑50 cases without entering the M01 pilot code, which was introduced in November. Please ensure the M01 code is entered when you review these cases for eligibility for processing.
Q & A:
Why are files re-numbered at the visa office? Why is this function necessary?
Although the CIO transfers the electronic file, the physical file is retained at the CIO. Unlike other file transfers currently undertaken by visa offices, the physical file is not transferred. The re-numbering function allows visa offices to retain their numbering system and use their pre-numbered B file jackets.
Why does the CIO need to close the file by entering PSDEC 4?
The CIO needs to be able to perform the full range of operational reporting as well as monitor staff productivity and performance. The use of existing PSDEC codes 2 and 4 allows the CIO to track outcomes and performance.
What information appears in the file transferred from CIO?
All data entered in CIO is retained including biodata, NOC codes and dates, and CAIPS notes entered by CIO.
Can I access the re-numbering function through the F7 Paperscreening screen?
No. CAIPS will prompt user to return to F6 – Immigrant Create / Edit / View screen in order to re-number the file.
What if I re-open a CIO file without re-numbering?
Before a CIO file is re-opened, CAIPS provides numerous prompts to the user to re-number the file. However, once the file has been re-opened, CAIPS will not allow any changes to the file number. A new B-file will need to be created if the visa office wishes to use a local B-file number/jacket.
Will file re-numbering result in two records for the same file in the Visa Office’s CAIPS database? What does this mean for operational reporting?
No. The re-numbered visa office B-file replaces the CIO file record. The local CAIPS database retains only 1 record of the file. Whether the file is re-numbered or re-opened, the decision entered by the CIO is re-set to 0, allowing the visa office to record its decision on the file. All files transferred from the CIO will eventually have a decision recorded by the visa office. In terms of operational reporting, this means that the Visa Office will be able to continue to monitor its decision volumes and outcomes. The CIO will perform its own operational reporting to monitor volumes and outcomes at its office.
CAIPS does not allow me to enter a PSDEC 2 – what’s wrong?
If RPRF has been paid, CAIPS will not allow you to enter a negative decision until the RPRF field is changed to an acceptable refund code, ie. RFR.
Why does the visa office need to enter its own PSDEC?
The CIO recommends FSW cases for processing but it is the visa office that is ultimately responsible for determining eligibility for C‑50 processing. The Visa Office decision is based on a review of the full application and supporting documentation, which was not available to the CIO. Once the visa office decides the application is eligible for processing, processing begins and the applicant is no longer able to obtain a refund of processing fees.
