Basis for Assertion that Agencies are In It for the $$?

[Anonymous]

I bet most of that $ goes to lawyers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you all think that AP agencies are making such big bucks doing this, then why doesn't someone else start a competing AP company with lower prices for both HFs and APs and take all of the business. The fact that there are so many different AP agencies out there and that none of them are currently doing this, suggests that despite the complaints of posters here, there isn't a huge huge profit just sitting around for running an AP company.

You have no idea how business works, if they are not making huge profit they get out. In Canada for example, agencies fees are $1000 and APs get the minimum wage. It is doable, but not by only one agency, it has to come from the top, from the DoS.

[Anonymous]

Some agencies do undercut the others. For example APC is only $8600 in agency fees while CCAP is $9100.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m no apologist for the agencies but AP pays their visa APPLICATION fee but do not pay for any of the fees associated with actually issuing and sponsoring their J1 visa once their application is approved.
Fees also cover health insurance for AP.

APs pay for their own insurance, actually.

Yes, sorry, that’s what what I meant, the $1k-$2k APs pay on their own includes their visa *application* and their health insurance premium.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Some agencies do undercut the others. For example APC is only $8600 in agency fees while CCAP is $9100.

APC used to be even cheaper before the HFs exodus from CCAP after their new system was implemented, APC increased their price by a lot more than the usual $200-300/year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you all think that AP agencies are making such big bucks doing this, then why doesn't someone else start a competing AP company with lower prices for both HFs and APs and take all of the business. The fact that there are so many different AP agencies out there and that none of them are currently doing this, suggests that despite the complaints of posters here, there isn't a huge huge profit just sitting around for running an AP company.

I work with other J categories. I can say that there is a huge amount of compliance work for J programs, so it wouldn't surprise me if it's actually somewhat expensive for the au pair program sponsors. With universities, there is an existing campus infrastructure to use for the J-1 EVs. I'm assuming the au pair agencies need to replicate a lot of that without any economies of scale.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you all think that AP agencies are making such big bucks doing this, then why doesn't someone else start a competing AP company with lower prices for both HFs and APs and take all of the business. The fact that there are so many different AP agencies out there and that none of them are currently doing this, suggests that despite the complaints of posters here, there isn't a huge huge profit just sitting around for running an AP company.

I work with other J categories. I can say that there is a huge amount of compliance work for J programs, so it wouldn't surprise me if it's actually somewhat expensive for the au pair program sponsors. With universities, there is an existing campus infrastructure to use for the J-1 EVs. I'm assuming the au pair agencies need to replicate a lot of that without any economies of scale.

“Program sponsors”? You mean the very wealthy AP agency owners, but nice try, PP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you all think that AP agencies are making such big bucks doing this, then why doesn't someone else start a competing AP company with lower prices for both HFs and APs and take all of the business. The fact that there are so many different AP agencies out there and that none of them are currently doing this, suggests that despite the complaints of posters here, there isn't a huge huge profit just sitting around for running an AP company.

I work with other J categories. I can say that there is a huge amount of compliance work for J programs, so it wouldn't surprise me if it's actually somewhat expensive for the au pair program sponsors. With universities, there is an existing campus infrastructure to use for the J-1 EVs. I'm assuming the au pair agencies need to replicate a lot of that without any economies of scale.

“Program sponsors”? You mean the very wealthy AP agency owners, but nice try, PP.

Program sponsor is the J-1 term for the entity administering the program/handling the SEVIS record. It doesn't mean that they are funding it. I have no idea how much it actually costs to run an au pair program, I'm just pointing out that J programs do require quite a bit of work to stay in compliance.

[Anonymous]

Wish the State Dept required basic stats, including what percentage of contracts get completed, and what percentage are broken. What’s going on is very fishy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wish the State Dept required basic stats, including what percentage of contracts get completed, and what percentage are broken. What’s going on is very fishy.

They do collect those stats, but you have to FOIA them I guess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wish the State Dept required basic stats, including what percentage of contracts get completed, and what percentage are broken. What’s going on is very fishy.

They do collect those stats, but you have to FOIA them I guess.

You say that based on what? Nothing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wish the State Dept required basic stats, including what percentage of contracts get completed, and what percentage are broken. What’s going on is very fishy.

They do collect those stats, but you have to FOIA them I guess.

No evidence that they collect these statistics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wish the State Dept required basic stats, including what percentage of contracts get completed, and what percentage are broken. What’s going on is very fishy.

They do collect those stats, but you have to FOIA them I guess.

You say that based on what? Nothing.

Oh bless your heart.
22 CFR § 62.31
(m) Reporting requirements. Along with the annual report required by regulations set forth at § 62.17, sponsors shall file with the Department of State the following information:

(1) A summation of the results of an annual survey of all host family and au pair participants regarding satisfaction with the program, its strengths and weaknesses;

(2) A summation of all complaints regarding host family or au pair participation in the program, specifying the nature of the complaint, its resolution, and whether any unresolved complaints are outstanding;

(3) A summation of all situations which resulted in the placement of au pair participant with more than one host family;

(4) A report by a certified public accountant, conducted pursuant to a format designated by the Department of State, attesting to the sponsor's compliance with the procedures and reporting requirements set forth in this subpart;

(5) A report detailing the name of the au pair, his or her host family placement, location, and the names of the local and regional organizational representatives; and

(6) A complete set of all promotional materials, brochures, or pamphlets distributed to either host family or au pair participants.

[Anonymous]

§ 62.15 Reporting requirements.
(a) Sponsors must submit annual reports to the Department of State that are generated through SEVIS on Form DS-3097. Such reports must be filed on an academic, calendar, or fiscal year basis, as directed by the Department of State in the sponsor's letter of designation or redesignation, and must contain the following:

(1) Program report and evaluation. A summary of the activities in which exchange visitors were engaged, including an evaluation of program effectiveness, program difficulties, and number of staff used in the administration of the exchange visitor program;

(2) Reciprocity. A description of the nature and extent of reciprocity occurring in the sponsor's exchange visitor program during the reporting year;

(3) Cross-cultural activities. A description of the cross-cultural activities the sponsor provided for its exchange visitors during the reporting year;

(4) Proof of insurance. Certification of compliance with insurance coverage requirements set forth in § 62.14;

(5) Certification. The following certification:

“I certify that the information in this report is complete and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief; and, that the above named program sponsor has complied with all health and accident insurance requirements for exchange visitors and their accompanying spouses and dependents (22 CFR 62.14).”

(i) For exchange visitor programs classified as “Government Programs,” this certification will be signed by the Responsible Officer.

(ii) For exchange visitor programs classified as P-1 or P-2 “Academic Programs” this certification will be signed by the institution's Chief Executive Officer or Responsible Officer.

(iii) For exchange visitor programs classified as P-3 and P-4 “Private Sector Programs,” this certification will be signed by the organization's Chief Executive Officer or Responsible Officer.

(6) Program participation. A numerical count of all exchange visitors participating in the sponsor's program for the reporting year (i.e., by category, form usage, active status at one point during the annual cycle, and by other status).

(b) Sponsors of P-3 and P-4 “Private Sector” programs must file a program specific management review (in a format and on a schedule approved by the Department of State).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wish the State Dept required basic stats, including what percentage of contracts get completed, and what percentage are broken. What’s going on is very fishy.

They do collect those stats, but you have to FOIA them I guess.

No evidence that they collect these statistics.

LOL not sure what you mean when my “evidence” is otherwise known as “the law of the United States of America,” which is published and can be read by anyone in the Code of Federal Regulations.
Obviously the agencies don’t publish them for public consumption. But like I said, you can FOIA them from DoS and it looks like Politico did in 2015:

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=0000015b-0cf2-d4b9-abff-3ffe31fd0001