What you guys think?? > ITA Predictions <

[fatani]

I was always predicting from past 3-4 months that scores will fall below 450. And ITAs will be in a region of 2500. But what is happening is also beyond my expectations the score has rapidly fallen to 434 and the ITA numbers are keep increasing.

And to go with it they have done back to back draws when there were no possibility of a draw today because the timeline of draws were going consistent. IRCC has sen 7500+ ITAs in just 8 days. What do you guys think what is happening here and why are they doing this? And will there be any pitfalls in future or in future draws?

I am just asking in a general way to people who are here on this forum not like that I am against what IRCC is doing right now. My assumption is that the rate at which they are going 425 barrier looks likely to be broken in next 2-3 draws. What you guys think?

 

[xpressentry]

Re: What you guys think??

If the trend continues, provinces won't make any money through PNPs.

 

[last_try]

Re: What you guys think??

right.. my guess is 420 will be broken in 3 draws. If it happens.. it will be free fall to 410.

 

[chente]

Re: What you guys think??

I don't think they will let it fall much more, at least they want the people who got ITA have CLB9, i think.

 

[fatani]

Re: What you guys think??

I don't think they will let it fall much more, at least they want the people who got ITA have CLB9, i think.

They are doing early draws inviting record number of people its tough to think what is up next. After inviting 3600+ people after every draw in 2 weeks the least you would have expected a draw on march 1. And that too off record No. Of ITAs and that too after opening of OINP.

 

[fatani]

Re: What you guys think??

If the trend continues, provinces won't make any money through PNPs.

That is why OINP is giving only 14 days to submit an application and that too because of system glitches they will give only 7 days. And they will make money from it.

 

[vensak]

Re: What you guys think??

The problem is not, that provinces will not get Money for PNP applications. It is more like to lock the people, so that they would be serious about their PNP application (investment).

The problem is following.
There is immigration plan for 2017. For EE, we can only count 2 categories
71k of Economical immigrants
51k of PNP immigrants. But here only part of them use EE (in 2015 it was 13%, last year 26% and estimation for this year app. 1/3).

In total let us say 90k immigrants.

App. average of 1 application is 2,2 immigrants behind.
So that would give us 41k of approved applications per year (3410 per month).

Now we see more than 7k of ITA per month, but the immigration plan stays the same.
That only leads me to thinking that, they consider, that more than 50% of all ITA will end up in failure (applicant will decline it, application will get cancelled or rejected).

It can create following:
1. process delays (in case same amount of immigration officers will do this job). We might come to the point, where 6 months will not be valid anymore
2. big cancellation rate (they will cancel your application fast for any minor processing mistake).

 

[vj3171]

Re: What you guys think??

this might be little off topic.
when they are issuing ITAs in such large no. PRR processing time should be steady enough to catch up with this trend. I am a Dubai applicant and Abu Dhabi VO has a record of minimum 10 months processing time. So now its a big concern for us how they wud accommodate if at all there is a high volume from this region.

 

[vensak]

Re: What you guys think??

I would suggest to rename this thread so that people have an idea what is in it.

 

[ajithj]

Re: What you guys think??

2017 target for FSW, CEC and FST is 72,000. Target for PNP is 51,000.

Assuming that 50% of PNPs are processed via express entry, the total number of immigrants processed through express entry would be 72,000 + 25000 = 97,000

If 1 ITA = 1 immigrant (assuming that the number of additional family members applying equals the number of ITAs that are declined by applicant or rejected by CIC). CIC has to issue around 8000 ITAs per month to meet the target.

 

[Sluffy]

Re: What you guys think??

App. average of 1 application is 2,2 immigrants behind.
So that would give us 41k of approved applications per year (3410 per month).

Now we see more than 7k of ITA per month, but the immigration plan stays the same.

Or they will follow last year sample, when for the period from May to November mostly PNP candidates received ITAs

2017 target for FSW, CEC and FST is 72,000. Target for PNP is 51,000.

Assuming that 50% of PNPs are processed via express entry, the total number of immigrants processed through express entry would be 72,000 + 25000 = 97,000

If 1 ITA = 1 immigrant (assuming that the number of additional family members applying equals the number of ITAs that are declined by applicant or rejected by CIC). CIC has to issue around 8000 ITAs per month to meet the target.

The 2015 approval rate was about 90%
And family members and dependants were 1:1. It means roughly 1 ITA = 2 visas

 

[fatani]

Re: What you guys think??

The problem is not, that provinces will not get Money for PNP applications. It is more like to lock the people, so that they would be serious about their PNP application (investment).

The problem is following.
There is immigration plan for 2017. For EE, we can only count 2 categories
71k of Economical immigrants
51k of PNP immigrants. But here only part of them use EE (in 2015 it was 13%, last year 26% and estimation for this year app. 1/3).

In total let us say 90k immigrants.

App. average of 1 application is 2,2 immigrants behind.
So that would give us 41k of approved applications per year (3410 per month).

Now we see more than 7k of ITA per month, but the immigration plan stays the same.
That only leads me to thinking that, they consider, that more than 50% of all ITA will end up in failure (applicant will decline it, application will get cancelled or rejected).

It can create following:
1. process delays (in case same amount of immigration officers will do this job). We might come to the point, where 6 months will not be valid anymore
2. big cancellation rate (they will cancel your application fast for any minor processing mistake).

I think processing delays can happen but if let suppose 45K applicants will land in 2017 there will be lots of applicants that land in 2017 would have received their ITAs in mid to late 2016 because if on avg processing time is 8-9 months in successful application. in half of 2017 80% people landed would have received ITAs in 2016.

We have to look at lots of things because now they have given 3 months to submit an application so if anyone who would have received ITA last day he/she has till 1 june to submit an app. If people take extra time to submit their app they and face delay like if their app is approved in 7-8 months it will definatlely take them to 2018 to land.

And if an applicant recieved an ITA last day it will take him suppose till 15th march to do medicals. So even if his/her app gets approved in nov or dec 2017 his/her visa will be valid till march 15th 2018. he/she might delay landing as lots of people do take 1-2 months to land because its not easy to relocate or in some ways medical conditions like pregnancy stops them.

So above points should be taken into consideration as well with the reject ITAs and unsuccessful applications.

 

[vensak]

Re: What you guys think??

2017 target for FSW, CEC and FST is 72,000. Target for PNP is 51,000.

Assuming that 50% of PNPs are processed via express entry, the total number of immigrants processed through express entry would be 72,000 + 25000 = 97,000

If 1 ITA = 1 immigrant (assuming that the number of additional family members applying equals the number of ITAs that are declined by applicant or rejected by CIC). CIC has to issue around 8000 ITAs per month to meet the target.

What I could not find properly in old statistics is the nr. of issued ITA that were declined or expired.
I have seen one statistics from early 2016, where it was claimed following about success rate:
FSW - 90 %
CEC - 86 %
PNP - 96 %

That would give you app. 88% of the average success rate (PNP was smaller group compared to others).
So does it mean, that they count that around 40% of all ITA will expire or will be declined. (while we have longer time to apply - 90 days)
And if it was not the case in the past, do they actually estimate higher rejection rate?

 

[ajithj]

Here are some statistics from an old post

That is nonsense. The statistics show otherwise: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/statistics/facts2014/permanent/02.asp

For example, in 2014, in terms of skilled workers there were 28,773 primary applicants who gained permanent residence. There were 38,712 people who gained PR as a dependent or spouse. So for every primary applicant there were approximately 1.34 spouses/dependents. You're well off the mark suggesting that 1 ITA = up to 4 PRs.

Working on the basis of 1.34 to 1 ITA alone, you can expect that 2500 ITAs would mean approximately 5,850 total PRs. This isn't even accounting for the fact that many ITAs don't actually go anywhere. Remember that 1 ITA does not equal 1 PR. There are many ITAs which time out as the applicant doesn't complete the documentation within 60 days, there are many which get rejected as circumstances have changed since the EE profile was created and many who get rejected for a multitude of other reasons. In reality it's lower than this due to the factors I've mentioned.

2015 statistics back this up as well - www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/reports/ee-year-end-2015.asp

Out of 31,063 ITAs issued, only 21,562 applications were received from primary applicants, totalling 37,424 applicants and their family members. On this basis, it appears that 1 ITA actually leads to 1.2 PRs - although in reality it will be lower than this even due to rejections.

 

[fatani]

Here are some statistics from an old post

If that is the case and even if we suppose 1 ITA = 1.25 Visa so it means they have to draw 6000-7000 ITAs so they are going in right direction