Correlation between RQ Size and Processing Time

Starting with mine:

It would be helpful to include whether the RQ was reviewed and how long it took.

Thank you. Total for RQ processing only as I am trying to assess how likely is the size of the RQ response to delay one's RQ review.

Size: +600Pages submitted December 24,2012

Edited by SARABC - 24 Sep 2013 at 8:33pm

I am fairly sure that the quality of the RQ submission, in conjunction with the quality of the applicant's case, will have a far more substantial impact on how long it takes for an applicant's case to make its way through the system. Number of pages is irrelevant, really; what is on those pages is far more relevant. Moreover, what concerns or questions are at stake will also have a larger impact on how it goes than how many pages of credit card transactions an applicant submits.

I also agree with akella's observation that the more significant question is about who gets to be scheduled for the oath versus who waits for a hearing with the Citizenship Judge. However long RQ cases are taking in any given local office, the latter, the cases going to a hearing, will take a lot, lot longer than those which proceed to the oath. That is the fulcrum that matters: does the response to RQ convince CIC sufficiently to make a paper-review referral rather than a hearing referral?

Given that actual merit, and the quality of documentation submitted, will most likely have a far greater impact on how things go than how many pages of documents were submitted, whatever sample of reports a forum like this could elicit will offer little or no insight into whether longer submissions have a good, bad, or neutral impact.   



Caveat; the longer observation:
I have not received RQ yet, let alone responded, so I have no direct experience with how it goes.

My views about how to respond to RQ are discussed at length in the topic about responding to RQ. I have made it clear I think that less is more, subject, however, to the caveat that for some, more is better (perhaps necessary), and that ultimately how much to submit is a personal decision, dependent on the particulars in the individual's case.

I suppose the best way to say this is to say that the stronger the applicant's case is, the less documentation the applicant needs to submit in support of it; the weaker the case, the more incentive there is to include more.

Another way of looking at that, however, is to infer that the applicant who submits kilos of documents is making up for some issues, some concerns, some gaps, and so that applicant might very well expect a much longer timeline while CIC initiates and waits for the results of this or that inquiry or investigation.

That is, there may very well be a correlation between large submissions and longer timelines. But that correlation is more about the merits and less about how many pages of documents are submitted.

And, of course, this would be a rather unreliable correlation, since out of what an applicant thinks is caution, he or she might submit an extra-large, even excessive submission of documents even though in fact he or she has a solid case for which there really should be no doubts or concerns at all.

At the other end of the table, there are many indications (ranging from references in judicial opinions as well as to suggestions in CIC internal communications) that there is no shortage of applicants who fail to submit much documentation at all. The anticipated CIC inference is obvious: such applicants do not have documentation because they were not really living in Canada (or at least not so much as they have reported). I dont' think there is any rush to a hearing for such applicants, so far as I can discern, and actually many of these applicants seem to be stuck on an extra-long timeline. So there may be a correlation between very slight responses and a longer timeline.

Bottom-line: how many pages of documents submitted probably does not bear directly on how strong the case really is, and the latter is more likely to affect how long that applicant's case takes.

I realize the focus for this inquiry, about a possible correlation between RQ response size and RQ review time, is focused on the more specific timeline, the time it takes CIC to "review" a RQ submission, and I am referring, instead, to overall timelines. This is intentional. I doubt that applicants can reliably discern how long it took CIC to "review" their RQ submission. For some there may be a relatively close approximation if there is a clear progression of the file from RQ response received to being scheduled for the test, but for many others the prospect of collateral steps (inquiries, investigations), having an impact on how long it is between the RQ submission and the next-step, looms large.

Moreover, I agree with akella's observation, which in my view is about files going into queue and being processed in order, no sorting in advance. How many officers are doing the RQ review for how many RQ'd applicants in that local office is likely to be a more dominant factor in how long it takes to review the RQ submission.

Additionally, my sense is that when a file is picked-up/opened, it is processed, however long that takes, subject to a variety of outcomes, some of which are to make inquiries or referrals for investigation. How long a particular applicant's case takes, then, is determined by whether the outcome of that process (which for pre-test RQ'd applicants, I believe is the pre-interview check) is to schedule the test or to put it in another queue for a different process, inquiry, referral.

The other aspect of akella's observations, about whether there is a correlation between the size of the RQ submission and whether the case is referred for a CJ hearing, highlights, in my view, what is important: how well the documentation supports the applicant's declarations of residency. Is it convincing?

That will almost certainly be a far more relevant factor in who is referred for a hearing, who is not.

No one at CIC will be counting pages, not for the purpose of assessing the submission anyway. More pages will not necessarily correspond to more proof.

Sure, the obviously excessive submission may be problematic, particularly if there is in fact an outstanding concern about the applicant's residency qualification.

Sure, the obviously lacking submission will be problematic.

Bottom-line: I tend to think that size does not much matter. (Which, some might think, is the opposite of my wife's perspective.)