The response rate of each region is worth watching. The response rate will be varied by region and is directly impactful on what case numbers we see at the end. If less people respond, final case numbers go higher.
Every year, there are some people that do not proceed with their win. We call them “non responses” and this year we can identify them as the cases that are current but still showing “at NVC” in the CEAC data. However, we also know that someone may simply have submitted their form late and is waiting for that to complete. That case will also show as “at NVC”. So – we can look at the non response rate, but remember it is still “maturing”
This year, for the first time, the new DS260 form was introduced. We know the processing has created a backlog of processing, but it is also possible that the new form had an impact on how many people responded. Perhaps the change meant less people could get help with completing the forms, or perhaps having the form online made it more or less likely that people would complete it – we just don’t know. So – I took a look at the response rate thus far.
What was interesting to me was in the case of EU and AF there seems to be a change in the response rate between lower numbers and higher case numbers. If you take a look at the charts below you can see that EU has a low response rate in the early case numbers and the average response rate increases. This is due to Uzbekistan and Ukraine. Both have very high entry rates – but very high agent involvement and it seems a lot of their winners just don’t bother proceeding. This is significant as it has caused me to understate the response rate as 40%, when in fact we can see that the going forward response rate for EU will be at least 47% – and will rise from there. That number one month ago was 42% – so it seems likely the response rate will mature to over 50% in the next month.
In AF region, the average response rate drops in the low 20K range. The reason for thisis because of the two countries limited in the VB, Egypt and Ethiopia. Those cases may have responded, BUT they are not current so they show as “at NVC”.
AS region is less revealing – and I have included it for completeness only. The average of 63% applies throughout the range.
Hope that is interesting to some of you. All this information educates and demystifies the whole process. It is useful to analyze the data and make sure the patterns we see can be explained. I will keep an eye on this and issue an update at some point in the future.
Response rate analysis as of March