United States Immigrants Admitted: All Countries data was reported at 1,127,167.000 Person in 2017. This records a decrease from the previous number of 1,183,505.000 Person for 2016. United States Immigrants Admitted: All Countries data is updated yearly, averaging 451,510.000 Person from Sep 1900 (Median) to 2017, with 118 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 1,827,167.000 Person in 1991 and a record low of 23,068.000 Person in 1933. United States Immigrants Admitted: All Countries data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by US Department of Homeland Security. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United States – Table US.G087: Immigration.

United States Immigrants Admitted: Mexico data was reported at 170,581.000 Person in 2017. This records a decrease from the previous number of 174,534.000 Person for 2016. United States Immigrants Admitted: Mexico data is updated yearly, averaging 153,629.500 Person from Sep 1986 (Median) to 2017, with 32 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 946,167.000 Person in 1991 and a record low of 66,533.000 Person in 1986. United States Immigrants Admitted: Mexico data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by US Department of Homeland Security. The data is categorized under Global Database’s USA – Table US.G087: Immigration.

Immigrants Admitted: Philippines data was reported at 53,287.000 Person in 2016. This records a decrease from the previous number of 56,478.000 Person for 2015. Immigrants Admitted: Philippines data is updated yearly, averaging 54,446.000 Person from Sep 1986 (Median) to 2016, with 31 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 74,606.000 Person in 2006 and a record low of 30,943.000 Person in 1999. Immigrants Admitted: Philippines data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by US Department of Homeland Security. The data is categorized under Global Database’s USA – Table US.G086: Immigration.

Public use data set on new legal immigrants to the U.S. that can address scientific and policy questions about migration behavior and the impacts of migration. A survey pilot project, the NIS-P, was carried out in 1996 to inform the fielding and design of the full NIS. Baseline interviews were ultimately conducted with 1,127 adult immigrants. Sample members were interviewed at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months, with half of the sample also interviewed at three months. The first full cohort, NIS-2003, is based on a nationally representative sample of the electronic administrative records compiled for new immigrants by the US government. NIS-2003 sampled immigrants in the period May-November 2003. The geographic sampling design takes advantage of the natural clustering of immigrants. It includes all top 85 Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) and all top 38 counties, plus a random sample of other MSAs and counties. Interviews were conducted in respondents'' preferred languages. The baseline was multi-modal: 60% of adult interviews were administered by telephone; 40% were in-person. The baseline round was in the field from June 2003 to June 2004, and includes in the Adult Sample 8,573 respondents, 4,336 spouses, and 1,072 children aged 8-12. A follow-up was planned for 2007. Several modules of the NIS were designed to replicate sections of the continuing surveys of the US population that provide a natural comparison group. Questionnaire topics include Health (self-reports of conditions, symptoms, functional status, smoking and drinking history) and use/source/costs of health care services, depression, pain; background; (2) Background: Childhood history and living conditions, education, migration history, marital history, military history, fertility history, language skills, employment history in the US and foreign countries, social networks, religion; Family: Rosters of all children; for each, demographic attributes, education, current work status, migration, marital status and children; for some, summary indicators of childhood and current health, language ability; Economic: Sources and amounts of income, including wages, pensions, and government subsidies; type, value of assets and debts, financial assistance given/received to/from respondent from/to relatives, friends, employer, type of housing and ownership of consumable durables. * Dates of Study: 2003-2007 * Study Features: Longitudinal * Sample Size: 13,981

Analysis of ‘Missing Migrants Dataset’ provided by Analyst-2 (analyst-2.ai), based on source dataset retrieved from https://www.kaggle.com/jmataya/missingmigrants on 14 February 2022.

--- Dataset description provided by original source is as follows ---

About the Missing Migrants Data

This data is sourced from the International Organization for Migration. The data is part of a specific project called the Missing Migrants Project which tracks deaths of migrants, including refugees , who have gone missing along mixed migration routes worldwide. The research behind this project began with the October 2013 tragedies, when at least 368 individuals died in two shipwrecks near the Italian island of Lampedusa. Since then, Missing Migrants Project has developed into an important hub and advocacy source of information that media, researchers, and the general public access for the latest information.

Where is the data from?

Missing Migrants Project data are compiled from a variety of sources. Sources vary depending on the region and broadly include data from national authorities, such as Coast Guards and Medical Examiners; media reports; NGOs; and interviews with survivors of shipwrecks. In the Mediterranean region, data are relayed from relevant national authorities to IOM field missions, who then share it with the Missing Migrants Project team. Data are also obtained by IOM and other organizations that receive survivors at landing points in Italy and Greece. In other cases, media reports are used. IOM and UNHCR also regularly coordinate on such data to ensure consistency. Data on the U.S./Mexico border are compiled based on data from U.S. county medical examiners and sheriff’s offices, as well as media reports for deaths occurring on the Mexico side of the border. Estimates within Mexico and Central America are based primarily on media and year-end government reports. Data on the Bay of Bengal are drawn from reports by UNHCR and NGOs. In the Horn of Africa, data are obtained from media and NGOs. Data for other regions is drawn from a combination of sources, including media and grassroots organizations. In all regions, Missing Migrants Projectdata represents minimum estimates and are potentially lower than in actuality.

Updated data and visuals can be found here: https://missingmigrants.iom.int/

Who is included in Missing Migrants Project data?

IOM defines a migrant as any person who is moving or has moved across an international border or within a State away from his/her habitual place of residence, regardless of

  (1) the person’s legal status; 
  (2) whether the movement is voluntary or involuntary; 
  (3) what the causes for the movement are; or 
  (4) what the length of the stay is.[1]

Missing Migrants Project counts migrants who have died or gone missing at the external borders of states, or in the process of migration towards an international destination. The count excludes deaths that occur in immigration detention facilities, during deportation, or after forced return to a migrant’s homeland, as well as deaths more loosely connected with migrants’ irregular status, such as those resulting from labour exploitation. Migrants who die or go missing after they are established in a new home are also not included in the data, so deaths in refugee camps or housing are excluded. This approach is chosen because deaths that occur at physical borders and while en route represent a more clearly definable category, and inform what migration routes are most dangerous. Data and knowledge of the risks and vulnerabilities faced by migrants in destination countries, including death, should not be neglected, rather tracked as a distinct category.

How complete is the data on dead and missing migrants?

Data on fatalities during the migration process are challenging to collect for a number of reasons, most stemming from the irregular nature of migratory journeys on which deaths tend to occur. For one, deaths often occur in remote areas on routes chosen with the explicit aim of evading detection. Countless bodies are never found, and rarely do these deaths come to the attention of authorities or the media. Furthermore, when deaths occur at sea, frequently not all bodies are recovered - sometimes with hundreds missing from one shipwreck - and the precise number of missing is often unknown. In 2015, over 50 per cent of deaths recorded by the Missing Migrants Project refer to migrants who are presumed dead and whose bodies have not been found, mainly at sea.

Data are also challenging to collect as reporting on deaths is poor, and the data that does exist are highly scattered. Few official sources are collecting data systematically. Many counts of death rely on media as a source. Coverage can be spotty and incomplete. In addition, the involvement of criminal actors in incidents means there may be fear among survivors to report deaths and some deaths may be actively covered-up. The irregular immigration status of many migrants, and at times their families as well, also impedes reporting of missing persons or deaths.

The varying quality and comprehensiveness of data by region in attempting to estimate deaths globally may exaggerate the share of deaths that occur in some regions, while under-representing the share occurring in others.

What can be understood through this data?

The available data can give an indication of changing conditions and trends related to migration routes and the people travelling on them, which can be relevant for policy making and protection plans. Data can be useful to determine the relative risks of irregular migration routes. For example, Missing Migrants Project data show that despite the increase in migrant flows through the eastern Mediterranean in 2015, the central Mediterranean remained the more deadly route. In 2015, nearly two people died out of every 100 travellers (1.85%) crossing the Central route, as opposed to one out of every 1,000 that crossed from Turkey to Greece (0.095%). From the data, we can also get a sense of whether groups like women and children face additional vulnerabilities on migration routes.

However, it is important to note that because of the challenges in data collection for the missing and dead, basic demographic information on the deceased is rarely known. Often migrants in mixed migration flows do not carry appropriate identification. When bodies are found it may not be possible to identify them or to determine basic demographic information. In the data compiled by Missing Migrants Project, sex of the deceased is unknown in over 80% of cases. Region of origin has been determined for the majority of the deceased. Even this information is at times extrapolated based on available information – for instance if all survivors of a shipwreck are of one origin it was assumed those missing also came from the same region.

The Missing Migrants Project dataset includes coordinates for where incidents of death took place, which indicates where the risks to migrants may be highest. However, it should be noted that all coordinates are estimates.

Why collect data on missing and dead migrants?

By counting lives lost during migration, even if the result is only an informed estimate, we at least acknowledge the fact of these deaths. What before was vague and ill-defined is now a quantified tragedy that must be addressed. Politically, the availability of official data is important. The lack of political commitment at national and international levels to record and account for migrant deaths reflects and contributes to a lack of concern more broadly for the safety and well-being of migrants, including asylum-seekers. Further, it drives public apathy, ignorance, and the dehumanization of these groups.

Data are crucial to better understand the profiles of those who are most at risk and to tailor policies to better assist migrants and prevent loss of life. Ultimately, improved data should contribute to efforts to better understand the causes, both direct and indirect, of fatalities and their potential links to broader migration control policies and practices.

Counting and recording the dead can also be an initial step to encourage improved systems of identification of those who die. Identifying the dead is a moral imperative that respects and acknowledges those who have died. This process can also provide a some sense of closure for families who may otherwise be left without ever knowing the fate of missing loved ones.

Identification and tracing of the dead and missing

As mentioned above, the challenge remains to count the numbers of dead and also identify those counted. Globally, the majority of those who die during migration remain unidentified. Even in cases in which a body is found identification rates are low. Families may search for years or a lifetime to find conclusive news of their loved one. In the meantime, they may face psychological, practical, financial, and legal problems.

Ultimately Missing Migrants Project would like to see that every unidentified body, for which it is possible to recover, is adequately “managed”, analysed and tracked to ensure proper documentation, traceability and dignity. Common forensic protocols and standards should be agreed upon, and used within and between States. Furthermore, data relating to the dead and missing should be held in searchable and open databases at local, national and international levels to facilitate identification.

For more in-depth analysis and discussion of the numbers of missing and dead migrants around the world, and the challenges involved in identification and tracing, read our two reports on the issue, Fatal Journeys: Tracking Lives Lost during Migration (2014) and Fatal Journeys Volume 2, Identification and Tracing of Dead and Missing Migrants

Content

The data set records

Projected Deaths by Single Year of Age, Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin for the United States: 2016-2060 // Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division // There are four projection scenarios: 1. Main series, 2. High Immigration series, 3. Low Immigration series, and 4. Zero Immigration series. // Note: Hispanic origin is considered an ethnicity, not a race. Hispanics may be of any race. // For detailed information about the methods used to create the population projections, see https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/popproj/technical-documentation/methodology/methodstatement17.pdf. // Population projections are estimates of the population for future dates. They are typically based on an estimated population consistent with the most recent decennial census and are produced using the cohort-component method. Projections illustrate possible courses of population change based on assumptions about future births, deaths, net international migration, and domestic migration. The Population Estimates and Projections Program provides additional information on its website: https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/popproj.html.

This table contains 25 series, with data for years 1955 - 2013 (not all combinations necessarily have data for all years). This table contains data described by the following dimensions (Not all combinations are available): Geography (1 items: Canada ...) Last permanent residence (25 items: Total immigrants; France; Great Britain; Total Europe ...).

This Dataset contains year and country wise Nonimmigrant Visas issued by USA to citizens of other nations

The U.S. Census defines Asian Americans as individuals having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, or the Indian subcontinent (U.S. Office of Management and Budget, 1997). As a broad racial category, Asian Americans are the fastest-growing minority group in the United States (U.S. Census Bureau, 2012). The growth rate of 42.9% in Asian Americans between 2000 and 2010 is phenomenal given that the corresponding figure for the U.S. total population is only 9.3% (see Figure 1). Currently, Asian Americans make up 5.6% of the total U.S. population and are projected to reach 10% by 2050. It is particularly notable that Asians have recently overtaken Hispanics as the largest group of new immigrants to the U.S. (Pew Research Center, 2015). The rapid growth rate and unique challenges as a new immigrant group call for a better understanding of the social and health needs of the Asian American population.

This table contains 36 series, with data for years 1953 - 1976 (not all combinations necessarily have data for all years), and was last released on 2012-02-16. This table contains data described by the following dimensions (Not all combinations are available): Unit of measure (1 items: Persons ...) Geography (1 items: Canada ...) Origin of migrants (2 items: Overseas and the United States; Overseas ...) Intended occupations and dependents (18 items: Total immigration; Workers; managerial and administrative; Workers; professional; Total workers ...).

Acknowledgement

The following table is imported from the 2019 Yearbook of Immigration Statistics under the Department of Homeland Security:

The 2019 Yearbook of Immigration Statistics is a compendium of tables that provide data on foreign nationals who are granted lawful permanent residence (i.e., immigrants who receive a “green card”), admitted as temporary nonimmigrants, granted asylum or refugee status, or are naturalized. The Yearbook also presents data on immigration enforcement actions, including apprehensions and arrests, removals, and returns.

Table 39. Aliens Removed or Returned: Fiscal Years 1892 to 2019 (https://www.dhs.gov/immigration-statistics/yearbook/2019/table39)

Inspiration

The data was collected to observe trends in history reflecting the number of immigrants deported - more specifically removed or returned.

description: This report provides estimates of the number of unauthorized immigrants residing in the United States as of January 2006 by period of entry, region and country of origin, and state of residence. The estimates were obtained using the same residual methodology employed for estimates of the unauthorized population in 2005 (see Hoefer, Rytina and Campbell, 2006).; abstract: This report provides estimates of the number of unauthorized immigrants residing in the United States as of January 2006 by period of entry, region and country of origin, and state of residence. The estimates were obtained using the same residual methodology employed for estimates of the unauthorized population in 2005 (see Hoefer, Rytina and Campbell, 2006).

The main dataset ("ESB Mobility Database") contains occupational data on 1,200 Irish immigrants who arrived in the U.S. in the Famine years and could be tracked for at least a decade. We also present the most up-to-date version of our Emigrant Savings Bank Depositor Database, which contains data on all 15,000 people who opened accounts at the bank from 1850 to 1858. Also provided are data from the 1855 New York State census documenting the occupations of New York's entire Irish-born population as well as datasets documenting the occupations held by New York's Irish immigrants one year and ten years after their arrival in America,

Facts and Figures 2015: Immigration Overview–Permanent Residents presents the annual intake of permanent residents by category of immigration from 1990 to 2015. The main body of the publication consists of a series of statistical tables and charts covering the ten-year period from 2006 to 2015. The report depicts selected characteristics for permanent residents.

The statistics for admission of permanent residents are provided for the three main categories of immigration—family class, economic immigrants and refugees—as well as for other immigrants who do not qualify in any of these categories.

The AmeriCorps Office of Research and Evaluation provides grants to researchers, scholars, and dissertators at institutions of higher education, enabling them to engage in comprehensive studies on civic engagement, volunteering, and national service. Studies include a variety of populations and ranges from local to organizational, and national contexts throughout the United States.

This AmeriCorps Research Grantee dataset provides comprehensive information about the grantees and their studies. For each award, we identify the: 1) study title; 2) background; 3) cohort year; 4) principal investigators and their affiliated university; 5) study location(s) associated with each grant; 6) civic engagement topic areas; and 7) the research approach. Please be aware that there may be multiple rows corresponding to a single research grantee study, reflecting the various study sites where the grantee is actively involved.

Each study was thematically coded to identify their civic engagement topic areas. An individual study can be categorized into more than one group. The topic areas include: • Arts & Culture, • Community Development, • Education Across the Life Course, • Youth Development, • Environment and Climate Change, • Health & Social Wellbeing, • Immigrants, Immigration & Refugees, • Economic Opportunity and Employment, • Social Equity, • Senior Development, and • Volunteering, Nonprofit Studies, and National Service.

Additionally, the research grantees’ studies were categorized into two distinct research approaches: traditional research and participatory research.

To learn more about the studies’ civic engagement topic areas and research approaches, please refer to the AmeriCorps Research Grantee Data Dictionary under Attachments.

For up-to-date information surrounding the AmeriCorps Research Grantees please see: • What is a Research Grant? https://americorps.gov/sites/default/files/document/What%20is%20a%20Research%20Grant_053023_final_508.pdf • AmeriCorps Research Grantee Activities and Insights: https://americorps.gov/grantees-sponsors/research-evaluation/grantee-profiles • Participatory Research: https://americorps.gov/sites/default/files/document/2021_07_20_ParticipatoryResearchOnePager_ORE.pdf

Historical chart and dataset showing Yemen immigration statistics by year from 1960 to 2015.

This research adds to the expanding field of data-driven analysis, scientific modeling, and forecasting on the impact of having access to the Internet and IoT on the general US population regarding immigrants and immigration policies. More specifically, this research focuses on the public opinion of undocumented immigrants in the United States and having access to the Internet in their local settings. The term Undocumented Immigrants refers to those who live in the United States without legal papers, documents, or visas. Undocumented immigrants may have come into the country unlawfully or with valid documentation, but their legal status has expired. Using the 2020 American National Election Studies (ANES) time series dataset, I investigated the relationship between internet access (A2I) and public perception of undocumented immigrants. According to my research and analysis, increasing internet access among non-Hispanic whites with at least a bachelors degree with an annual household income of less than 99K is more likely to oppose the deportation of undocumented immigrants and separating unaccompanied children from their families in borderland areas. The individuals with substantial Republican political ideology exhibit significantly lower opposing effects in deporting undocumented immigrants or separating unaccompanied children from their families. The evidence from multiple statistical models is resilient to a variety of factors. The findings show that increased internet access may improve undocumented immigrants social integration and acceptability. During health emergencies, it may be especially beneficial to make them feel safe, included, and supported in their local settings.

The dataset consists of the number Removals by Country of Citizenship by the United State's Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in each fiscal year. An ICE removal is defined as the compulsory and confirmed movement of an inadmissible or deportable noncitizen out of the United States.