International Studies Office/Process Simplification Work Group
Final Report
July 8, 2000
I. Introduction
In January 2000, the International Studies Office/Process Simplification (ISO/PS) Work Group
was formed to examine key activities managed by ISO. The goal was to determine if the quality,
effectiveness, and efficiency of selected processes could be improved as a means of better serving the
University’s objectives for international education.
As outlined in the group’s mission statement, expected outcomes included:





Improved communication about ISO services and opportunities that are available and
about program requirements
Reduced duplication of effort (i.e., more efficient support; more time available for creative
and meaningful work)
Easy access to information
Improved coordination/communication among ISO areas/staff and with other University
units; and
Less time spent on the routine and more on the exception.
Appendix A outlines the group’s mission.
Christina Morell, Office of the Vice President for Management and Budget, served as group leader. Other
group members include: Robin Cook, International Center (IC); Clare Cosgrove, IC: Bridget Ganey, ISO;
Miles Gibson, Office of the Vice President for Management and Budget; Suzanne Louis, ISO; Jessica
Roberts, ISO; Richard Tanson, ISO; and Marcia Taylor, ISO.
II. Approach to Work
To determine what processes to review, the work group inventoried all of the activities managed by ISO.
These activities fell into the following categories: recruitment, admissions, orientation, advising, and
training/supervision for students, faculty, and staff (for a listing of all of the processes identified see
Appendix B). Once these tasks were inventoried, the group developed a list of criteria by which to select
four key processes to review (see Appendix C for a list of these criteria). Based on these criteria, the
work group agreed to examine the following:
1. Study Abroad: from when a student is recruited to participate in a program, through the advising,
application, and pre-departure orientation session.
2. Bringing in Foreign Faculty/Staff: from when a department contacts ISO for help in securing or
extending and/or changing the visa status of a foreign faculty/staff member hired, to when the
foreign national is on payroll.
3. Bringing in Undergraduate Students: from when an undergraduate student receives information on
the steps required to obtain a visa through when the student visa (I-20) is issued and ISO
disseminates the visa and orientation packet to new students.
7/6/00
1
4. International Host Student Program (ISHP): from when a student is contacted to participate in a
program either as a host or “hostee,” through the application, selection, and initial orientation
process.
Process Simplification (PS) staff managed all of the data collection. To meet the group’s objectives, PS
staff sought to gather information from the following three key sources: (1) ISO staff involved in
administering the process; (2) persons who are at the receiving end of the process (e.g., study abroad
participants; new foreign faculty/staff; departmental staff involved in bringing in a foreign national); and
(3) institutions regarded by ISO staff as best practices models. In addition, key stakeholders, such as the
Director of ISO and the Senior Associate Director of Admission, were interviewed to obtain their
perspectives on the activities being evaluated.
1) ISO Interviews:
To understand the elements of each of the processes under review, PS staff started their work by
interviewing the appropriate ISO representatives involved in each activity. For each respective process,
information was obtained on the volume of activity; how many people in the office are involved in the
process; what are their main responsibilities; what are the key start and end points within sub-elements of
the processes under review; and what were some of the key challenges the staff faced in administering the
process. An interview guide was used to conduct these interviews (see Appendix D for a sample set of
questions). Once completed, all interview summaries were submitted to ISO staff for review, and changes
were made based on clarifications offered.
2) “Customer” Surveys
To learn about the experiences of persons benefiting from ISO’s services, the following populations were
surveyed:






Students who had participated in study abroad during the past calendar year
Departmental Faculty and Staff who work with ISO to bring in new foreign faculty/staff
or to extend/change the visa status of a foreign national already on Grounds
Foreign faculty who either arrived as new employees to the University within the past
year or extended and/or changed their visa status during this time frame
Foreign undergraduate students who were admitted as first-years or as transfers during
the academic year
Students serving as hosts in the International Student Host Program
Students who participated in the ISHP as “hostees.”
Random samples of students who participated in study abroad (30 total) and who arrived as new foreign
undergraduate students (40 total) during the past academic year were obtained from the Registrar’s
Office. University Human Resources provided the random sample of 40 foreign faculty/staff who arrived
as new employees during the past year, or who extended/and or changed their visa status during this time
frame. The ISHP sample (45 hosts; 80 hostees) was obtained from the ISHP program coordinator.
Finally, ISO staff provided a listing of ten departments in the Schools of Medicine, eight in the College of
Arts and Sciences, and three in the School of Engineering that had been involved in bringing in foreign
faculty/staff during the past year. This approach was followed to ensure the work group received input
7/6/00
2
from departments who were familiar with the process. PS staff contacted each department listed to
identify the appropriate department staff representative to survey, as well as to solicit from the
departmental staff the names of three or four faculty who were involved in the process. In total, 28
department staff and 68 faculty were surveyed.
PS staff developed the surveys with input from ISO staff. All of the surveys were administered by e-mail;
the responses were submitted directly to PS staff who analyzed and summarized the results.
Limitations:
The surveys were conducted during the month of April. Although the response rate of employees was
within acceptable ranges, most student input was extremely limited (the most significant response rate
came from study abroad participants). This limited response rate was not surprising given the time of
year (i.e., end of the academic semester). Since minimal input was received from ISHP participants, and
in light of certain changes that already were being pursued by the program’s administrators, the work
group decided not to pursue this process any further. In addition, very few undergraduate students
responded to the survey focusing on their experiences coming into the University. This limited response
rate, coupled with changes underway in the New Orientation program, prompted the work group to
narrow the scope of its review of the bringing in undergraduate students to key interactions between ISO
and Admission.
Once all internal information was collected, PS staff proceeded to obtain data from external sources. The
input sought form these external sites was limited to the redefined project scope.
3) Best Practices Institutions
PS staff contacted several other universities to learn how they manage their study abroad
programs, as well as the processes for bringing in foreign faculty/staff and students to their institutions.
The schools contacted were: Cornell University, Duke University; the University of Michigan, and the
University of Wisconsin at Madison. All interviews were conducted by telephone. Data were collected
on organizational structure, staff support, volume of activity, processing of work, elements of their
processes that work well, and key challenges they face in meeting their objectives. An interview guide
was used during the course of the interviews (see Appendix F for a sample).
7/6/00
3
III. Summary of Findings
1) ISO Interviews
For each of the programs reviewed, ISO staff are responsible for all administrative aspects of the work.
Table 1 provides information in summary form of the major responsibilities staff have in these areas
(note: the information provided is limited to the scope of this project. ISO staff have other
responsibilities, such as helping faculty/staff secure permanent residency status and admitting graduate
students, which are not included in this matrix):
Number of Staff
Study Abroad
Bringing in Faculty
1 Full-time (Study
Abroad Adviser)
2 Part-time (Office
Manager, Director of
ISO)
9 part-time student
volunteers peer
advisers; non-paid
1 Full-Time
(International Faculty
Adviser responsible for
H-1 B, TN, O-1 visas)
1 ¾ Time (Associate
Director, Exchange
Visitor Program
responsible for J-1
visas)
Bringing in Undergraduate
Students
1 Full-Time (Foreign
Student Adviser
responsible for F-1)
1 ¼ time (Associate
Director, Exchange Visitor
Program)
note: the H-1B
designated officer
serves as the alternate
for the J-1 officer
Basic
Responsibilities
7/6/00
One-on-one advising;
review applications
UVa and affiliate
programs; register
accepted applicants;
coordinate with
faculty directors of
programs; general
communications
regarding programs;
collection of Leave of
Absence fees and
UVa summer
program application
materials; processing
of payments for
faculty participants in
certain programs;
Advise departments on
appropriate visa status;
prepare applications
(review information,
gather data; resolve
questions); consult with
outside
agencies/institutions;
make referrals to
appropriate
departments; process
INS fees; research
changes in regulations;
advise foreign faculty
Provide advice as
requested; review student
files; gather missing
documentation; issue F-1
(i.e., I-20) visa to students;
prepare and distribute preorientation materials to
new students; participate in
orientation
4
Study Abroad
Volume of Activity
(avg. per year)
Peak Time
Bringing in Faculty
conduct pre-departure
orientation sessions
600 students
H-1, TN, O-1 (150)
J-1 (400)
Year-round (fall,
Year-round
spring, and summer
programs)
Bringing in Undergraduate
Students
F-1 (130)
May through August
Additional data collected during these interviews were used to develop process maps that outline the
basics steps involved in the processes examined (see Appendices A though C). For the visa issuance
process, the work group focused on H-1B (Temporary Worker – Specialty Occupations), J-1 (Exchange
Visitors Program), and F-1 (Student Visa; I-20) visas, which account for approximately 90% of visas
issued.
For all three activities reviewed, staff noted similar challenges to more effectively administering their
work and to improving the quality of interactions they have with members of the University community.
Limited understanding on the part of key constituencies regarding program requirements, insufficient
technology, limited access to ISO staff, inappropriate space, and lack of sufficient support to administer
the volume of activity were identified as key challenges. Below are examples of some of the issues raised
during the interviews:
Study Abroad (SA): Limited staff support makes it difficult for the SA Adviser to do anything more than
the absolute minimum maintenance required. U.Va. has one study abroad adviser who is responsible for
advising 600 participants in addition to managing a number of program tasks. Peer advisers help in the
process, but typically students want access to professional staff, which makes meeting their advising
needs a challenge. There is no systematic process in place to coordinate with faculty program advisers,
which limits the quality of advice SA can offer students.
Most of the processing involved is done manually; none of the required SA forms are available on-line,
and no information on program participants is maintained on a database. Since the web site has not been
updated, communication with students is not as effective as it should be. For example, although changes
were implemented last year to simplify aspects of the application process (e.g., simplification of Transfer
of Credit forms), the modifications were not communicated clearly with students. Compounding this
aspect of the program is the issue of accepting transfers of credits. Although this is a school-related
matter, ISO often deal with students’ quandaries regarding this issue. SA offers a pre-departure
orientation session, yet SA staff are limited in their capacity to address questions regarding a variety of
programs. Finally, because most of the publication materials used for the program are homegrown, they
lack a level of quality that is desirable to effectively market the program.
Bringing In Faculty and Staff: This process is predicated by state and federal approvals, which usually
take several months to obtain, yet departments tend to seek assistance within a time frame that oftentimes
cannot be accommodated. For H-1B visas, it takes Immigration and Naturalization Services about three
months to review and approve a petition, which it receives after approvals have been granted by the
7/6/00
5
Virginia Employment Commission and the Department of Labor. Institutional departments are asked to
allot approximately four months to receive the approvals required, but usually do not seek help until
several weeks before a visa expires. J-1 visas do not require the same approvals as H-1B visa. However,
departments sometimes assume they can obtain a J-1 visa, when in fact it is not appropriate for an
employee because the foreign national does not meet the stated criteria. Although department staff,
especially those that have been dealing with visa issues, have some familiarity with federal requirements,
there is a need for improved communication in this area. Also, ISO staff are contacted on a weekly basis
for legal assistance, yet they do not have the expertise to respond to these questions. Currently, ISO relies
on the advice of a legal firm in Richmond. However given the issue of access to this resources, plus the
complex nature of legal questions they receive, ISO staff spend a significant amount of time trying to
resolve these problems.
Again, an outdated website makes it difficult for ISO staff to communicate effectively with their key
target audiences (i.e., departmental staff/faculty; foreign faculty/staff) about this process. Publication
materials regarding ISO services in this realm are limited. Internal tracking of applications is done
manually; there is no database in place to house critical information. Since no administrative support is
available for visa processing, ISO visa advisers manage every aspect of administrative work. The time
required for administrative tasks, coupled with the volume of work, limits accessibility to ISO staff.
Bringing In Students: For undergraduate students, ISO must receive various financial records in order to
issue a student visa, yet about 80% of the files received lack this information. Since the forms are
supposed to be sent with the admission application (they are required, but applications are accepted
without them), ISO has no way of knowing these data are missing until after Admission forwards key
sections of the student’s file, which they do between May 15 and early June (Admission and ISO keep
separate files for students). Although e-mail has facilitated communication with students coming from
abroad, it is nonetheless difficult to access this population and obtain the information required in the
available time frame (i.e., before the end of August). Once a student’s paperwork is complete and ISO
can issue the I-20, it also forwards a pre-orientation packet to students. Delays in international mail
impact distribution of this information in a timely manner, and overnight mail is not currently a viable
alternative, given ISO’s budgetary constraints. Since ISO does not review the application materials of
students until after they have accepted admission, its timetable limits the amount of time available for the
office to forward relevant information to students prior to their arrival.
Although the F-1 forms are available on-line, the rest of the process is conducted manually. ISO has
software in place intended to facilitate tracking of student records along with processing of visa forms.
However, glitches in the system are making it difficult to integrate old information with new data. No
technical or administrative support is available for work related to this process. Finally, the orientation
materials, which are developed internally, should be enhanced to better serve students.
2) Survey Findings
In general, the responses received from the groups surveyed were positive. Similar need areas emerged
across all constituencies surveyed, including better use of technology, more access to staff, and improved
communication regarding program requirements.
Study Abroad:
7/6/00
6
The response rate for this survey was 43% (13 out of 30 students). Overall, students agreed that the
information available regarding study abroad opportunities; the advice they received from SA staff about
program options and the application process; and the pre-departure orientation session was useful.
However, they indicated that improved accessibility to professional staff, more on-line processing of
forms, and better use of the web are areas requiring improvement. They also noted what appeared to be
limited faculty support for participation in study abroad programs and difficulties surrounding the transfer
of credit process. When asked about ways to improve their experience in this process, students offered
the following suggestions:










Provide up-to-date information on the web site
Provide U.Va. program information/necessary paperwork on the web site
Place all relevant information/paperwork on-line (i.e., to download paperwork)
Provide access to a searchable database for information on programs
Serve as intermediary between students and departments regarding transfer-of-credit issues
Place more attention on non-U.Va. programs/make more information available (e.g., big
schools, SIT)
Provide more advice/help in general (staff should be more accessible)
Standardize the transfer-of-credit process
Institute mandatory one-on-one advising sessions before going abroad (e.g., to address
general questions; to discuss program)
Target study abroad sessions to schools
Bringing In Faculty and Staff:
A) Department Staff/Faculty Involved in Process
24% of faculty (14 out of 59) and 63% of departmental staff (17 out of 27) responded to this survey. A
majority of faculty and staff surveyed agreed that ISO staff are accessible and offer useful information.
However, whereas a majority of staff agreed that ISO provides ready access to written information and
forms that were easy to understand and complete, and that ISO staff offered helpful answers to questions
in a timely manner, faculty opinions often disagreed. In particular, a majority of faculty respondents
found fault with the accessibility and comprehensibility of forms and instructions involved in the H-1
process, and with ISO staff’s timeliness and usefulness in answering questions regarding this process. On
the other hand, a majority of faculty comments on these elements of the J-1 process were positive. A
majority of faculty also found fault with the accessibility and comprehensibility of departmental
information on these processes.
Both faculty and staff surveys noted inconsistent availability of information from ISO, limited
accessibility of ISO staff, and the need for more training. When asked for ways to improve their
experiences in these processes, faculty and staff respondents offered the following suggestions:


7/6/00
Make a full-time ISO staff member dedicated to the School of Medicine
Provide up-to-date information on the ISO website, with forms and instructions on-line and
links to federal regulations
7




Create an email listserv for departmental staff to provide updates and improve the flow of
information from ISO
Provide a simplified form for extensions
Make available more workshops and training for departmental faculty and staff
Improve the accessibility of ISO staff for in-person advising (versus email)
B) Faculty and Staff at the Receiving End of the Process
The response rate for this survey was 34% (17 out of 50 international faculty and staff). Large majorities
of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that ISO offered ready access to information that was easy to
understand, and that ISO staff gave useful answers to questions in a timely manner. A smaller majority of
respondents offered favorable evaluations of their departments’ handling of these elements of the
processes. In addition, approximately eighty percent of respondents did not feel these processes take too
long.
While responses were largely positive, most criticisms focused on the accessibility or consistency of
information provided by ISO staff. International faculty and staff offered the following recommendations
as ways that their experiences in these processes could be improved:






Provide up-to-date information for foreign nationals on the ISO website
Email notices of training sessions and important information to foreign nationals
Provide handbooks on the processes to international faculty and staff
Raise awareness of ISO both among incoming international faculty and staff and among
departmental faculty and staff
Provide more training for departmental staff involved in the processes
Improve the ISO office environment (e.g., make the reception area more welcoming, have
a full-time receptionist on hand to greet visitors and answer basic questions)
3) Best Practices Research
Study Abroad:
The four schools contacted, Cornell University, Duke University, University of Michigan, and University
of Wisconsin at Madison, all have separate Study Abroad offices, with full-time staffs ranging from six to
nine (4-6 f/t professional staff and 2-5 f/t administrative staff). The offices also have paid student help,
ranging from 2-3 to 12-19 work study students. Their budgets for salaries and benefits range
approximately from $300,000 to $600,000 (note: no budget information was available from Cornell). All
four offices are funded wholly or in part through student fees for study abroad; the only available fee
information comes from Cornell and Duke, who charge study abroad students $3550 and $1770 per
semester, respectively.
While these offices do not necessarily handle more study abroad students than does U.Va.’s Overseas
Study Office, they are able to offer students more services and personal attention, while maintaining high
campus profiles for international study. The offices each have three to four professional staff available
for advising, which they often divide geographically by regions of linguistic and cultural expertise.
Professional staff in each office also enjoy greater time to coordinate program-specific orientations with
7/6/00
8
faculty and to train and supervise paid peer advisors, who handle a range of recruiting and advising duties.
Full-time directors in each of the offices lead outreach to academic departments and recruit faculty for
participation in study abroad programs. The four offices also have sufficient support staff to manage
clerical duties, including maintaining databases and libraries. Finally, staff in each office maintain and
update websites, which provide information on individual programs, steps for applying, and contact
information, among other things. None of the offices offers required forms on-line yet, although it is a
key goal for each.
Each of the offices views its staff as a strength and feels it handles its responsibilities well. Nevertheless,
the offices commonly cite as challenges the need to build faculty support for study abroad programs, the
need to increase participation in their programs, and the stress of managing their responsibilities as
participation does increase.
Bringing In Foreign National Faculty, Staff, and Undergraduate Students:
The four schools contacted each have at least one office dedicated to bringing in international faculty,
staff, and students (Wisconsin has separate offices for faculty/staff and for students; unless otherwise
indicated, information on these two offices has been combined). The offices have from nine to twelve
full-time staff to manage these processes, including from six to eight professional staff, and operating
budgets ranging approximately from $450,000 to $600,000.
Bringing in Faculty and Staff
Although the four schools have considerably larger populations of foreign national faculty and staff to
serve than does U.Va.’s International Studies Office, each is able to offer a wider array of services and to
manage its core visa processes more comprehensively. Cornell offers tax counseling and handles housing
for visiting scholars. Duke is participating in a pilot program with the INS, in which on-line submission
of visa documents greatly reduces process times. The director of Wisconsin’s Office of International
Faculty and Staff Services gets involved, when possible, in departmental hiring efforts, to forestall
problems with the H-1 visa cap. With a range of from 2¾ to nine full-time staff (versus 1¾ at U.Va.)
dedicated to faculty and staff visa processing, these offices generally manage visa processes in less time
while devoting greater time and attention to advising, coordinating with other departments, and training
for departmental staff and foreign nationals. Their administrative staff also manage a wider array of
clerical duties, including maintenance of multiple listservs and databases and production of visa
documents. Perhaps most significantly, these offices have well-defined, separable duties to be performed
by professional, and by administrative, staff, unlike at U.Va., where the three professional staff handle all
of the visa work for scholars and students.
Bringing In Students
While U.Va. has 1¼ staff dedicated to student visa work, the four schools interviewed have from three to
seven. And again, while these schools have in several cases much larger populations of foreign national
students, the offices focus much of their time and energy on processes which involve students who have
already arrived on campus. Indeed, of the four schools, only Duke issues initial I-20’s and IAP-66’s;
admissions offices at the other schools are responsible for initial documentation, obviating the current
problem at U.Va., in which two offices must coordinate the process. At Duke, admissions offices are
7/6/00
9
responsible for collecting all required information, which they then put on-line, for the International
Office to download. As noted above, these offices devote considerable time to advising, managing
databases and listservs, and training for students and departmental staff. Staffs are cross-trained and kept
abreast of current issues at regular staff meetings.
Comparative information on the best practices research is available below in Appendixes G and H, for
study abroad and for bringing in faculty, staff, and students.
IV. Recommendations
In shaping its recommendations, the team focused on criteria by which to judge if the proposed changed
would have an impact. Some of the criteria were outlined in the work group charge (e.g., improved
communication about ISO services; easy access to information; reduced duplication of effort). However,
based on student, faculty, and staff input, the list was expanded to include additional criteria by which the
work group gauged its recommendations. These criteria are (or refer to appendix)
The recommendations included in this report are listed numerically and organized according to the three
areas examined by the work group:
A. Study Abroad
B. Bringing In Foreign National Faculty and Staff
C. Bringing In Undergraduate Students
In addition, recommendations that impact ISO as a unit (e.g., way the office functions on a daily basis),
have been grouped under a fourth category:
D. ISO General Recommendations
In general, all of the recommendations stated below are intended to improve coordination,
communication, and cooperation within ISO and with other University departments. The goal of these
recommendations is to manage the processes for which ISO is responsible so that everyone involved
knows what they need to do, how they need to do it, and as a result, make the quality of their experience
positive and valuable.
A. Study Abroad:
1. The office should increase its number of professional SA advisors, to meet the volume of students
requesting advising (see D1 and D2 below).
2. ISO should update and expand the Study Abroad information available on its website to improve
students’ access to information and broaden their understanding of program requirements and
opportunities. The website should include information on what steps are necessary to participate in
specific programs and when these steps must be completed, and indicate ways students may obtain
assistance in this process. In addition, the website should include all institutional study abroad forms to
7/6/00
10
facilitate students’ processing of required paperwork. Finally, the website should serve as a mechanism
for Study Abroad staff to receive questions/input from students and other members of the University
community regarding their needs in this area.
Specific enhancements to the website would include the following:
A) Mission statement and goals for Study Abroad (SA). These statements would help students and
the community at large better understand the University’s objectives regarding the program and
ISO’s role in achieving these objectives.
B) A section on “Frequently Asked Questions” (FAQ’s) for students and parents, with email links
to SA advisors for answers to questions not included. These FAQ’s should be updated
regularly, adding answers to questions that advisors receive most often.
C) A list of SA professional staff with office hours and email links.
D) A caveat for non-U.Va. students (per the UC-Irvine website) stating that the policies, costs, and
available options are applicable only to University students. This caveat is important, given that
ISO wishes to provide general information regarding its programs to any visitors while
ensuring their understanding that the more specific information regarding tuition, transfers of
credit, etc., is applicable only to U.Va. students.
E) A process map to give students an easy-to-use visual aid to the steps involved in participating
in Study Abroad (i.e., recruiting, advising, admitting, and pre-departure orientation). The
process map should include students’ deadlines and responsibilities. This information should
also be available in linear form, as an application checklist, with timeline and calendar, so that
students can access information in whichever format is easier for them to understand.
F) An on-line guide to Study Abroad
G) An electronic version of the pre-departure orientation packet which participating students
receive, including a pre-departure checklist.
H) Updated information on all U.Va. programs, organized alphabetically. Programs could also be
accessible by clicking on a large world map. The website should also provide links to affiliate
programs (e.g., IES, DIS), exchange partners, and major external programs (e.g., Syracuse,
Butler), so that students can readily access information on all of the SA programs in which
University students regularly participate.
I) A list of approved consortium programs, for which the University accepts credits and provides
financial aid. In addition, information should be included on University policies regarding nonconsortium programs, in which U.Va. students are welcome to participate but for which they
may not receive course credit or financial assistance. Links to study abroad databases (e.g.,
StudyAbroad.com), should be offered, together with caveats regarding University policies,
transfer of credit, etc.
J) An on-line application for peer advisors
K) Information on all SA peer advisors, including their geographical areas of specialization,
contact information, and email links.
L) A list of undergraduate advisors with email links.
M) Links to other U.Va. departments (e.g., Financial Aid) and external sources of information
(e.g., insurance companies) so that students and parents may easily access other sources of
related information.
7/6/00
11
N) Electronic versions of all required forms (e.g., Leave of Absence form, Transfer of Credit
form), which students can either submit electronically or print, fill out, and submit as a hard
copy.
O) Links to University departments which lead Study Abroad programs (e.g., Hispanic Studies for
the Valencia program, School of Continuing and Professional Studies for its Oxford program),
so that students can readily access all University SA information from the ISO website.
P) Updated information for returned SA students
Q) A page covering requirements and questions regarding transfers of credit
R) Information on the SA library, including its contents and hours.
S) A separate page for visiting SA program reps, with links to Newcomb Hall, so that they can
make reservations directly in advance of visits to Grounds.
T) Thumbnail photos from the Study Abroad photo contest, both to publicize the contest and to
provide potential participants and the public with photographs depicting foreign campuses,
accommodations, landscapes, etc. Thumbnail photos from previous years’ contests could be
archived on the site and available for viewing.
U) A chat room for past, present, and potential study abroad students. This chat room would foster
communication among undergraduates regarding study abroad possibilities and experiences
and encourage a sense of community among the students. The chat room should include a
caveat reminding students that, while input/advice from other students is encouraged, it cannot
replace the expertise available from SA advisors. Such a caveat would both encourage students
to avail themselves of advising from SA advisors and discourage the proliferation of fallacious
information. SA advisors should regularly monitor the chat room to gauge the quality of advice
given and offer real-time “office hours” in the SA chat room for online advising.
3. The office should employ a short, “bypassable” phone menu to ensure that each call receives at least
basic information and is tracked.
4. The director of Study Abroad and/or the ISO director should serve on Grounds-wide committees to
build a study abroad presence at U.Va., to build faculty commitment, and to encourage student
participation.
5. The office should develop a process map which could be given to students to help them understand
the steps involved and their responsibilities for study abroad.
6. The office should increase its involvement in program-specific pre-departure orientation sessions by
partnering with departments. This step would improve the information available to students;
appropriately expand the office’s role in orientation; and improve the coordination between departments
and ISO staff.
7. The office should reorganize the SA library, color-coding information by program rather than year, to
improve accessibility and searchability.
8. The office should use an Access database to track current, prospective, past, and alumni SA
participants.
7/6/00
12
9. The office should keep a peer advisor in the ISO lobby during office hours to facilitate advising by
greeting visitors; directing them to the library or to staff offices; answering basic SA questions; writing
down names, contact information, and questions requiring answers from SA advisors; and setting
appointments with SA advisors. Such a policy would ensure that a visitor’s initial experience in the office
is as positive and fruitful as possible. It would also build expertise among the peer advisors, who would
receive training in the information they would need to know.
10. The office should develop an official logo/motto for Study Abroad (e.g., UVArrived . . . Now Go
Away) to build awareness on Grounds both of the SA office and of University SA possibilities. This
motto could be included in professionally-designed program posters in Admission packets and used for
recruiting (e.g., giving away posters, pens, bookmarks, etc., with the motto printed on them). The office
should hold a contest among undergraduates to determine this motto.
11. The office should run a Study Abroad fair, ideally in September (although the office would have to
coordinate with JMU and VMI, since representatives for external programs travel from one fair to
another) to increase on-Grounds awareness of study abroad opportunities and facilitate SA recruiting and
advising.
12. The office should strive to answer emailed questions in a more timely manner, to ensure that students
are receiving information quickly and to build goodwill with potential participants. The office should
track the questions it receives, so that it can provide the most up-to-date FAQ’s on its website (see above).
13. The office should explore the possibility of no longer collecting Leave of Absence fees itself, if there
is a way to manage this process more effectively (e.g., accepting credit cards so that payment could be
made directly to the Bursar’s Office). However, if this step would prove more time-consuming to
participating students, the office should explore other ways of managing this element of the process more
efficiently.
14. Information on the SA office should be included in packets sent to prospective students during the
summer, to build awareness and interest in international study.
15. The director of Study Abroad should be given professional and/or dean’s status and paid accordingly.
B. Bringing In Foreign National Faculty and Staff
1. The office should receive additional staffing, including at least one full-time clerical staff. In addition,
professional staff should receive salaries commensurate with their duties and positions (see D1 and D2
below).
2. ISO should update and expand the International Student and Scholar Programs (ISSP) information
available on its website to improve access to information and forms both for foreign nationals hired by the
University and for University faculty and staff involved in the process of securing visas and extending
and/or changing the visa status of foreign nationals. The website should include information on what
steps are necessary to secure or extend specific types of visas, who is responsible for each step, and when
each step must be completed. The website should also include all necessary forms and instructions to
facilitate processing of required paperwork. Finally, the website should serve as a mechanism for ISSP
7/6/00
13
staff to receive questions/input from foreign nationals and other members of the University community
regarding their needs in this area.
Specific enhancements to the website would include the following:
A) Electronic “packets” for each of the various subpopulations (e.g., departmental staff, foreign
nationals, etc.) served by the office, explaining the steps involved in securing a visa and
extending and/or changing one’s visa status. For instance, foreign nationals seeking
information on becoming permanent residents could click on the permanent resident button.
Each electronic packet should include all necessary forms and instructions, with a checklist of
responsibilities and turnaround times for ISSP’s responsibilities. These turnaround times
could vary depending upon time of year and quality/completeness of forms turned over to
ISSP by departments. Packets should also include a process map to provide a visual aid to the
steps involved in the process. Process maps could be color-coded to show responsibilities for
everyone involved (i.e., foreign nationals, departments, ISSP).
B) A calendar with descriptions and links to key events (e.g., training sessions, site visits, ISO
get-togethers, etc.) and deadlines for key process steps (e.g., deadlines for extending J-1 visas).
C) FAQ’s (e.g., on regulations, responsibilities, deadlines, etc.) with email links to ISSP advisors
for answers to questions not included. These FAQ’s should be updated regularly, adding
answers to questions that advisors receive most often.
D) Links to the regulations of federal and state agencies (e.g., Department of Labor, Immigration
and Naturalization Service, Virginia Employment Commission), with caveats telling users
when it will be easier/more efficient to seek information directly from ISSP advisors.
E) Mission statement and goals for ISSP. These statements would help foreign nationals,
departmental faculty and staff, and the community at large better understand the University’s
objectives regarding the program and ISO’s role in achieving these objectives.
3. The office should coordinate with departments to designate department liaisons, with whom ISSP
advisors could coordinate more efficiently on all pertinent process matters (e.g., completing forms,
updating regulations, etc.). Department liaisons should have their own listserv to receive information
most efficiently. The office should demonstrate to departments the advantages (e.g., time saved,
increased efficiency, development of departmental “experts” on whom faculty can rely for answers on
complex visa issues) of designating liaisons with ISSP. Department liaisons would also help expedite the
turnaround of materials, since they would have a good understanding of all process requirements,
timelines, etc.
4. The office should administer listservs to provide information to the various subpopulations it serves
(e.g., departmental administrative staff, department heads, current H-1’s, etc.) on key issues, such as
changes in federal regulations or training sessions for administrative staff. These listservs would facilitate
communication with the people and departments who rely on ISSP; ensure that responsible parties
received pertinent information in a timely manner; foster coordination with departments with whom ISSP
regularly interacts; build awareness of services, training sessions, and social opportunities available
through ISSP; and help ISSP project an image of thoroughness, timeliness, and professionalism.
5. The office should administer training sessions on all pertinent topics for foreign nationals and
departmental faculty and staff involved in processes, with a goal of increasing efficiency by answering
7/6/00
14
common questions once to an interested group, rather than repeatedly to individuals. Sessions should be
offered at least once per semester (1 in late October/early November, 1 in early spring). The office should
explore partnering with other offices (e.g., HR) for delivering training, but it should only partner with
other offices if the collaboration simplifies the process of training.
6. ISSP staff should engage in regular “outreach” (e.g., to Financial Aid, Medical School Dean’s Office,
Housing) to improve coordination with those offices, provide updates on changes to applicable processes,
and to increase staff expertise.
7. The University should either retain a legal advisor or make an attorney from the General Counsel’s
office available to ensure that ISSP staff have access to correct legal information. The General Counsel
should also join the American Immigration Law Association (AILA) to grant ISSP staff access to AILA’s
website and updates on regulations.
8. The office should strive to answer emailed questions in a timely manner, to ensure that foreign
nationals and departments are receiving information quickly and to build goodwill. The office should
track the questions it receives, so that it can provide the most up-to-date FAQ’s on its website (see above).
C. Bringing In Undergraduate Students
1. The office should coordinate with Admission to develop a process agreement, articulating
responsibilities, deadlines, and assurances of collaboration, in order to improve the efficiency and
timeliness of the process. The director of ISO and the Dean of Admission should agree to ensure that
their staffs adhere to the agreement so that both offices are able to fulfill their responsibilities efficiently
when bringing in foreign undergraduate students.
2. The office should receive additional staffing, including at least one full-time clerical staff for ISSP. In
addition, professional staff should receive salaries commensurate with their duties and positions (see D1
and D2 below).
3. Directors and staff from ISO and Admission should have a planning session before the peak season
(i.e., April 1 to mid-June) of undergraduate admissions to coordinate the process. This meeting would
ensure that the staffs’ efforts are sychronized, so that ISSP staff get access to student files as soon as
possible and are able to issue I-20’s more quickly and efficiently. A follow-up session should be
conducted after the process to evaluate how successfully the two offices coordinated their responsibilities.
4. An ISSP staff member should serve as a reader and committee member for international admissions, to
bring additional experienced eyes to the process and get ISSP staff involved with international
undergraduates earlier, which should facilitate and improve the office’s ability to advise them. The
graduate admission process could serve as a model: ISSP staff participate in graduate admissions by
evaluating applicants’ financial status before letters of acceptance are sent. The working group
recognizes that, while rolling admissions in the graduate schools make this step possible, the rigid
acceptance calendar for undergraduate admissions makes it impractical in this process. The goal is to find
a medium ground in which ISSP staff are enabled to review the applications of those foreign students who
will be offered admission to the University (i.e., approximately 300 of 900 total foreign applications) as
early in the admission process as possible, rather than in mid- to late April, as in the current arrangement.
7/6/00
15
Early review of applications is particularly important because approximately eighty percent of all files
currently forwarded from undergraduate admissions lack the complete financial documentation required
for ISSP to issue I-20’s.
D. General ISO Recommendations
1. Office professional staff should receive salaries commensurate with their duties and positions (see A1,
B1, and C2 above).
2. The office should receive additional staffing, including at least one full-time clerical staff for ISSP, one
full-time professional advisor for SA, and one full-time clerical staff for SA (see A1, B1, and C2 above).
3. The office should have a full-time director with a knowledge of the field. Full-time status is necessary
so that the director can take the time to understand and keep abreast of both the visa and study abroad
processes, to manage the office effectively, and to perform outreach across Grounds. This director should
either have a faculty appointment or dean’s status, to ensure that the office receives sufficient respect and
attention.
4. The office should have a full-time receptionist.
5. The office should have weekly staff meetings to provide updates on the various processes, allow staff
to discuss key issues they are working on, and build cooperation and coordination within the office. At
some meetings, representatives from other offices (e.g., HR, Medical School Dean’s Office) should attend
to improve inter-office coordination.
6. The University should create an international studies advisory committee to determine international
studies policy issues for the University. This committee would include representation from ISO (e.g., the
director), from SA, and from the International Student Advisory Committee.
7. The office should cross-train all staff so that everyone has general knowledge of all processes. Such
cross-training would ensure that any staff member could answer general questions in the lobby. In
addition, by mid-fall, each staff member should lead a one- to two-hour training session in his/her area of
expertise to build more extensive knowledge of all of the processes throughout the office. This crosstraining would also be intended to foster interest in and appreciation of coworkers’ responsibilities.
8. The University should create a position of Vice-Provost for International Studies, to advocate for the
ISO and build Grounds-wide awareness of international studies issues. Alternatively, a member of the
office should attend the Provost’s meeting with deans once per year to build awareness of the ISO
throughout the University.
9. The ISO lobby should be redesigned to improve its appearance and better accommodate visitors. This
room is often one of the first places on Grounds visited by important foreign visitors, potential scholars,
and potential students and their parents, and its appearance should be comfortable and welcoming.
10. The office should develop and implement an intra-office website, accessible via password, to enable
staff to share and access up-to-date information on all of the processes. This intranet would facilitate
7/6/00
16
access to all office information by making it available in one site, rather than in various databases and
application programs, thus increasing efficiency and eliminating unnecessary outlays of time required to
train all staff in programs only used by some.
11. ISO staff should use Corporate Time to improve internal coordination of responsibilities.
V. Critical Success Factors
For these recommendations to be effected, the University must invest considerable new funds in ISO,
both in the form of permanent budget increases for additional staffing and OTPS and one-time outlays for
vital improvements. Revamping the ISO website, for instance, will require both the expertise of other
University offices or outside vendors and extensive input from ISO staff, who cannot currently afford the
outlays of time necessary to create the proposed on-line information and documentation. Thus, many of
the proposed changes to the website cannot succeed unless additional staff is hired to ease workloads.
Many other proposed changes, such as listservs, databases, and increased advising, require additional
staffing.
In addition, current and future professional staff in the office must be paid salaries commensurate to their
duties and comparable with positions of similar responsibility on Grounds. Low office morale is
commonly cited by staff as a hindrance to change; staff continue to be paid insufficiently for workloads
that increase with the increasing numbers of foreign nationals on Grounds and increasing participation in
Study Abroad.
VI. Proposed Plan for Implementation
The above recommendations are offered in order of importance, and while some (such as Study Abroad
recommendations 2A, 2B, and 2C, above) can be effected with current staff within current workloads and
responsibilities, the majority will rely on increased staffing and funding for their implementation and
success.
7/6/00
17
Appendix G
ISO/PS Best Practices Matrix
Study Abroad
Cornell
Office Contacted
Cornell Abroad
Reporting Line
Einaudi Center for
International Studies;
President
Duke
Wisconsin
U.Va.
Overseas Opportunities
Office
Office of International
Studies and Programs
Dean of Trinity
College (Duke’s
college of arts and
sciences)
@20
12-13
4 f/t: Director, Asst.
4 f/t: Director (also an
Dir., Student Services Asst. Dean), 3 Asst.
Coordinator,
Directors
Financial Services
Coordinator
2 f/t: administrative
6 (5 f/t, 1 ¾-time)
assistant and library
assistant
Director of the
International Institute;
both Dean of Arts and
Sciences and Provost
11-12
6 f/t: Director, Asst.
Dir., Student Advisor,
Student Services Asst.,
2 office administrators
Dean of International
Studies; Chancellor
Students (paid and
volunteer)
14 paid: 2 student
peer advisors (10
hrs/wk); 12 student
recruiters (10
hrs/sem)
2-3 work study
(usually with study
abroad experience)
3-4 paid: 2-3 work
study, 1-2 graduate
students
12-19 paid: 2-4 half9 unpaid p/t Peer
time graduate students; Advisors
10-15 work study (peer
advising, outreach, etc.)
Who updates/
maintains website?
Clerical staff
Assistant Director
Student Services
Assistant
student
Total Staff
Professional Staff
(full-time and parttime; positions)
Clerical/
Administrative
Staff (full-time and
part-time)
7/6/00
Office of Study
Abroad
Michigan
2 f/t administrative
assistants
@25
5 f/t: Director (also an
Asst. Dean), Associate
Director, 2 Asst.
Directors, Student
Services Coordinator
4 f/t
Overseas Study Office in
the International Studies
Office
Director of International
Studies Office; Provost
12
1 f/t Study Abroad
Program Advisor;
1 p/t Director of ISO
1 p/t Office Manager
No one
18
Cornell
Duke
Michigan
Wisconsin
U.Va.
Overall operating
budget (percent of
salary/benefits and
other)
Not available
@$340,000:
@90% s/b =
@$306,000;
@10 other =
@$34,000
@$390,000:
@90% s/b =
@$350,000;
@10% other =
@$40,000
@$5,500,000:
@11% s/b =
@$600,000 (includes
tuition wavers for
graduate students);
@89% other =
@$4,900,000
Note: These figures are
for the entire ISO office
(i.e., ISSP and SA
combined).
$399,903:
83% s/b = $332,973
17% other = $66,930
Student
participation
(internal/external;
fall, spring, and
summer)
500/year internal and
external;
@150/fall,
350/spring
800-900/year internal
and external;
@400 fall, 150-200
spring, 250 summer
450-500/year internal,
@300/year external
641 last year internal,
300-400/year external
600 students
Basic
Responsibilities
Recruiting; one-onone advising;
admitting for internal
programs (although
in 4 of Cornell’s 7
schools, deans
actually admit
students into SA
programs);
orientation. Collect
applications for
external programs
Recruiting, advising,
admitting, and
orientation for 14
school-year programs
and 15-20 summer
programs
Recruiting, advising,
admitting, orientation;
office currently collects
program fees (but not
tuition), although it will
soon relinquish this
responsibility; posts
grades to students’
records. For external
programs, office
supplies, collects, and
forwards applications
“Mini university” for
internal programs:
recruiting, including
marketing and
publications; extensive
advising, first by peer
advisors, then
professional staff;
admitting, with
extensive oversight to
ensure proper academic
fits; orientation; collect
fees; post grades; plus
internal Accounts
Payable, Human
Resources, including
training of faculty who
participate in programs,
and disciplinary
responsibilities for
students in programs
Recruiting; one-on-one
advising; review
applications for U.Va.
and affiliate programs;
register accepted
applicants; conduct predeparture orientation
sessions; coordinate with
faculty directors of
programs; general
communications
regarding programs;
collection of Leave of
Absence fees and U.Va.
summer program
application materials;
processing of payments
for faculty participants in
certain programs
7/6/00
19
Cornell
Duke
Michigan
Wisconsin
Director and Asst.
Director advise on
appropriate
programs; Student
Services Coordinator
advises on
requirements; Peer
Advisors
Windows NT with
GroupWise for email
Director and three
Asst. Directors (divide
advising by
geography)
Director, Assistant
Director, Student
Services Assistant, and
Student Advisor
(divide advising by
geography)
Asst. Directors (divide
by geography), Student
Services Coordinator,
Peer Advisors
Program Advisor, Peer
Advisors
Microsoft Office,
Access database
Access database,
Pagemaker for
publicity, Excel
Access database,
PeopleSoft, Dynamics
for billing
Email
Required forms
Cornell Abroad
application, specific
program application,
2 recommendation
forms, proposed
course of study
program, statement
of purpose, official
transcript
Leave packet with 4
forms: Advising form,
legal waiver, forms for
external programs,
Final Notification
form
Application, second
application for some
programs, acceptance
form, Student-Parental
Permission form,
Health History form,
ISIC Application form,
Advisor Approval
form, optional Travel
Itinerary card
Application, Document
of Good Standing form,
Preliminary Course
Selection list, Statement
of Purpose,
recommendation, official
transcript, Waiver of
Liability form
Forms available
online?
No
No
No
Application, second
application for some
programs, Visa form,
Medical SelfAssessment form,
Insurance Verification
form, UW Waiver of
Responsibility, plus
forms for
recommendations,
housing, and course
selection for some
programs
No, although it’s a key
goal for summer 2000
What works well?
Knowledgeable staff;
good Peer Advisors;
strong handling of
step-by-step process;
good library
Excellent staff; great
administrative
support; committed
faculty
Everything works
reasonably well, but
much could be
improved; good
dissemination of
orientation materials to
students and parents
Who advises
students on Study
Abroad
opportunities?
Technology
systems/ software
7/6/00
U.Va.
No
Everything
20
Cornell
Duke
Michigan
Wisconsin
U.Va.
Challenges
Attracting more men
and minorities;
meeting
needs/expectations of
SA students while
ensuring that they
accomplish their
academic goals
Adapting to incoming
Director; trying to
innovate at Duke
Daily demands limit
ability of staff to stand
back and assess; trying
to increase student
participation and
faculty involvement;
getting students to
accept responsibility
Managing processes
despite increasing
participation; working
with Bursar, Registrar,
Financial Aid; Seeking
new faculty to
participate in programs;
keeping students from
feeling they get “the
run-around”
Insufficient staff; must
get web pages up-to-date;
must build Grounds-wide
commitment to Study
Abroad
Significant
changes (reasons)
None planned
Placing applications
and forms on-line,
because Dean is
pushing web-based
technologies;
standardizing internal
applications, to match
trends in the field
Outreach to schools
and departments
around campus, to meet
increased interest in
international studies;
relinquish collection of
program fees, because
it is not the best use of
staff time;
implementing for-credit
internships, because
they are rigorous and
deserve credit
Online applications and
forms, to increase
efficiency and save
time; add a half-time
staff for peak season, to
ease office workloads;
turn over typical
bursar’s and financial
aid functions to those
offices which have the
expertise
Fee for Study
Abroad
$3550/semester
$1770/semester
Not available
Not available
7/6/00
$64/semester
21
Appendix H
ISO/PS Best Practices Matrix
Bringing In Foreign National Faculty, Staff, and Students
Cornell
Duke
Michigan
Office Contacted
International
Students & Scholars
Office
International Office
International Center
Reporting Line
Einaudi Center for
International Studies
Total Staff
Professional Staff
(full-time and parttime; positions)
Duke Medical Center
(although office
receives dual funding
from Medical Center
and University)
12
6 f/t: Director, 2 Asst.
Directors, 3 Int’l.
Student Services
Advisors
Associate Dean for the
Multicultural Portfolio;
Dean of Students; Vice
President for Student
Affairs
25-35
8 f/t: Director, Program
Coordinator, 2 H-1 and
PR Specialists, 2 J-1
and F-1 Specialists, 2
Advisors
10
7 f/t: Director, Assoc.
Director, Asst. Dir.,
Administrative
Manager (HR work),
Housing Coordinator,
2 Program
Coordinators
3 f/t administrative
6 f/t: 5 staff
7 administrative staff:
assistants
specialists, 1 computer 4 f/t, 3 p/t;
specialist
10-20 p/t paid students:
10 work study Peer
Advisors, 1-4 interns,
3-5 for other work
Assistant Director
Computer specialist,
Program Coordinator,
Duke IT
students
Clerical/
Administrative
Staff (full-time and
part-time;
students)
Who updates/
maintains website?
7/6/00
Wisconsin
U.Va.
(1) International Faculty
and Staff Services;
(2) International Student
Services
(1) Director of Human
Resources;
(2) Dean of Students
International Studies
Office
(1) 3; (2) 14
(1) 1 f/t Director;
(2) 6:
5 f/t: Director, Asst.
Director, 3 Advisors;
1 6/10th-time
5
3 f/t: Associate
Director, Int’l. Faculty
Advisor, Foreign
Student Advisor
1 half-time Director
(1) 2: 1 f/t administrative
staff, 1 3/4 –time admin.
staff
(2) 8: 2 f/t administrative
staff; 6 students
1 f/t Office Manager
(1) Not currently
maintained; major
revamping is planned for
summer and fall;
(2) IT staff
Not currently
updated/maintained
Provost
22
Cornell
Duke
Overall operating
budget (percent of
salary/benefits and
other)
$499,000:
88% s/b = $440,500;
12% other = $58,500
$500,140:
78% s/b = $389,825;
22% other = $110,315
Responsibilities in
bringing in faculty
and staff
Complete counseling
and education to help
departments with
paperwork; provide
application packets
(some available online, others kept in
departments for
photocopying);
occasionally
intervenes to
straighten out
problems with
prevailing wage;
check and file
paperwork; also
handle housing for
visiting scholars and
act as a registered
volunteer tax
counseling office
New faculty/staff
visas processed
yearly (H-1B, J-1)
Faculty/staff
extensions
7/6/00
Michigan
Wisconsin
U.Va.
@$600,000:
90% s/b = $540,000;
10% other = $60,000
(1) @ $147,000:
92% s/b = @$135,000;
8% other = @$12,000
(2) $300,000+:
90+% s/b = @$270,000;
10-% other = @$30,000
Currently participating
in an INS pilot
program, CIPRIS
(Coordinated InterAgency Partnership),
aimed at streamlining
the regulation of int’l
students and scholars:
office processes
information forwarded
by depts.; submits
documents on-line
using blue bar-coded
visa documents,
saving considerable
time
Work with depts.
throughout H-1
process; prepare forms;
for J-1’s, depts. fill out
IAP-66 request forms;
office checks
information; produces
documents
(1) for H-1B’s: Director
tries to get involved in
hiring process to avert
visa problems; supply
depts. with H-1B
packets; reviews
documents for
completeness; files
documents
for J-1’s: supply depts.
with J-1 packets; check
paperwork; prepare
documents; send to
scholars
Note: These figures are
for the entire ISO office
(i.e., ISSP and SA
combined).
$399,903:
83% s/b = $332,973
17% other = $66,930
Advise departments on
appropriate visa status;
prepare applications
(review information,
gather data; resolve
questions); consult with
outside agencies/
institutions; make
referrals to appropriate
departments; process
INS fees; research
changes in regulations;
advise foreign faculty
@60 H-1B’s
@700 J-1’s
189 H-1B’s
439 J-1’s
@175 H-1B’s
@900 J-1’s
(1) @200 H-1B’s
@400 J-1’s
@40 H-1B’s
@350 J-1’s
68 H-1B’s
50 J-1’s
@75 H-1B’s
J-1 extension
(1) @100 H-1B’s
300+ J-1’s
65 H-1B’s
@200 J-1’s
23
processed yearly
information unavailable
Cornell
Duke
Michigan
Wisconsin
U.Va.
Staff involved in
bringing in
faculty/staff
3 f/t
9 f/t
6 f/t + Director
(1) 3: 2 f/t, 1 3/4 -time
Average
turnaround time
(H-1B, J-1)
H-1B: 1-14 days,
depending on depts.
J-1: 1-5 days
H-1B: 5-7 weeks
J-1: 2 weeks or less
H-1B: information
unavailable
J-1: 10 days or less
(1) H-1B: 1 day
J-1: 5 days
Responsibilities in
bringing in
students
(undergrad, grad)
Handle all extensions
and other paperwork
for undergraduate
and graduate students
(admissions offices
responsible for initial
I-20’s and IAP-66’s)
Download required
forms (which
admissions offices
check for
completeness and key
in on-line); produce I20’s; handle all
extensions
Handle all extensions
and other paperwork
for undergraduate and
graduate students
(admissions offices
responsible for initial
I-20’s and IAP-66’s)
(2) Handle all extensions
and subsequent
immigration document
work; advise; manage
orientation (admissions
offices responsible for
initial I-20’s and IAP66’s)
Provide advice as
requested; review
student files; gather
missing documentation;
issue F-1 (i.e., I-20)
visa to students;
prepare and distribute
pre-orientation
materials to new
students; participate in
orientation
Student visas
processed yearly
(undergrad, grad)
Extensions only:
@235 undergraduate
@470 graduate
75-100 undergraduate
400-500 graduate
Information
unavailable
(2) 1131 undergraduate
2076 graduate students
(in 1999-2000)
130 undergraduate
7/6/00
1 f/t
1 ¾ -time
24
Staff involved in
bringing in
students
3 f/t
7 f/t
4 f/t + Director
Cornell
Duke
Michigan
How do you
communicate with
other institutional
departments about
changes in
requirements?
Listservs for dept.
chairs and deans, for
dept. admin. assts.,
for scholars, for
students; website;
phone
Listservs for dept.
chairs and staff, for
students and scholars;
post notices on
website; hard copy
memos
Listservs for deans,
directors, and dept.
heads, for dept.
contacts, for scholars,
for int’l. students;
faculty/staff newsletter;
via informal groups
Technology
systems/software
FSA Atlas for I-20’s
and IAP-66’s;
MacInform for H1B’s, PR’s, O-1’s,
Q’s, and P’s;
Filemaker
Training for
administrative staff;
tax information
sessions; how-to
publications
CIPRIS software;
Access database;
Lotus Notes for I-20’s
and IAP-66’s
What training do
you provide for
either process?
7/6/00
Workshops for dept.
administrative staff;
Informational
meetings for visiting
scholars; payroll
workshops; student
workshops on OPT,
CPT, summer
internships, and inhouse document
processing
(2) 14, including 7 f/t
1 f/t (Foreign Student
Advisor responsible for
F-1)
1 ¼ -time
Wisconsin
(1) Listserv to dept.
chairs, secretaries, and
personnel reps; regular
meetings of personnel
reps;
(2) Admissions staff call
for updates; electronic
newsletter for students
In-house software for I- (1) Access database
20’s and IAP-66’s; ILS (2) Access database;
for H and PR forms;
Microsoft Excel; email
FoxPro database;
Microsoft Office;
email; website
Workshops for dept.
(1) Permanent Resident
administrative staff; J
workshops; H-1
immigration
workshops; I-9
informational meetings; workshops
employment and
(2) Cross-cultural
immigration workshops training for student
for students; H and
services offices
Permanent Resident
presentation for
students; US job search
workshops for students
U.Va.
Email; phone;
individual basis;
listserv for students
Email
25
What works well?
Staff is cross-trained
and kept up-to-date
via weekly meetings;
walk-in advising
service ensures
prompt advising
Cornell
Challenges
7/6/00
Retaining/training
staff; Cornell’s
decentralized
structure
Well-organized
breakdown of
responsibilities;
appropriate staffing
for workload
Smooth processes;
communication with
departments and
students; availability of
advisors for student
meetings (1-2 days)
Duke
Michigan
Getting depts. To
follow instructions;
getting foreign
nationals to meet
deadlines; working out
kinks in technological
tools
Getting sufficient
staffing for J-1’s and F1’s; integrating office
technologies with
systems used by
university and federal
agencies; finding more
time for non-visa
initiatives
(1) Smooth processes;
good relationship with
depts.
(2) Excellent visa/
immigration support;
good support for
students; excellent
community outreach
programs
Wisconsin
Communication with
deans’ offices; good
feedback from depts..
about H-1 and J-1
processes; computer
production of I-20’s;
few visa denials/high
credibility from federal
agencies
U.Va.
(1) Incorporating J-1
process (which moved
July 1 from other office)
into office; working
around H-1 cap; getting
involved in H-1 process
as early as possible
(2) Managing the change
of focus as office
switches out of services
to scholars (J-1’s);
making sure staff can use
available technology to
the fullest extent;
managing staff turnover
Improving recordkeeping system;
improving look of
orientation materials;
improving perception
of ISO; improving
timing of J-1 process;
improving relationship
with undergraduate
Admission office
26
Significant
changes (reasons)
7/6/00
Implementing a
database to track new
and extended visas,
to improve access to
information and save
staff time by
decreasing requests
for basic information
No
Cannot answer—new
Director is coming and
will set agenda
(1) Adding J-1 process;
improving website, to
meet expectations of
depts. and foreign
nationals
(2) Losing J-1 process,
because office reports to
Dean of Students
27