Recommendations for Local and State Governments

The federal government is failing to adequately reach out to and assist LPRs with naturalization in a meaningful way. As mayors across the country create and mature offices to welcome and assist immigrants, states and local governments can lead in naturalization.

One of the larger issues is getting the word out on naturalization benefits and what it takes to overcome application barriers. Regardless of whether a state or local government is already engaged in citizenship communication, our research identified two distinct opportunities where state and local governments can easily leverage existing infrastructure to further efforts — by placing outreach to immigrants in government spaces and by leveraging the data that the government already possesses to encourage eligible immigrants to naturalize.

Our interviewees responded well to this idea during testing; while many understood the difference between federal, state, and municipal governments, and understood that citizenship is determined only on the federal level, they perceived government as one group, and welcomed communication with all levels in the right contexts.

Recommendations for Context

Outreach in government spaces

During our testing, we introduced our subjects to a generic naturalization message within different spaces and via different methods. Two of the most accepted prompts were receiving information from an employee at the Department of Motor Vehicles and as a suggestion while signing up for state health insurance. Offering naturalization information brochures to individuals using foreign identity documents at the DMV would be a simple interception and have a fairly wide reach, but would require additional training or sensitivity guidelines.

“Overall it'd be great if the DMV was more involved in immigration matters, but that would be good. I've had trouble there even when I was eligible for my license.” Interviewee 13, during their response to the DMV testing prompt.

Similarly, state health exchanges often ask for an applicant’s immigration status, along with other information that would confirm whether the applicant is an LPR. While this might not be feasible for all states, those with high concentrations of LPRs, like New York and California, should consider this unique opportunity to be a trusted source of information about options and benefits afforded by naturalization.

It's important to note that these interventions tested positively because they were already exchanging sensitive identifying information with the government. Participants felt comfortable with the state health exchanges or DMV identifying them as an immigrant for additional assistance because they had to use documents like foreign passports or alien numbers to verify their identity. Contexts where the immigrant isn't sure if they are being targeted in a way that violates their privacy, like getting a prompt to naturalize while contacting the city phone line to report an issue, received negative responses. In those contexts, it is preferred for the messaging to be passive. For more information, see "Increase regularity, relevance and reach of naturalization message".

Outreach using existing data

Another avenue of outreach comes from the LPRs themselves — and the data they share with state and local government offices on a regular basis. This data is usually safeguarded by a single agency within government and is often used for reporting about the population and meeting various metrics. These offices could include naturalization outreach within their messaging based on the LPRs’ input. For example, a city housing authority will often request identity documents, which may consist of foreign passports or documentation from USCIS, since these services are available to non-citizens. Based on their status and time using the housing service, the city could have the required information to make an educated guess as to who is an eligible LPR and even assist them with fee waivers.

If a department or agency can’t incorporate naturalization outreach into their messaging or services, legal documents like memoranda of understanding should allow them to share information with other parts of the government structure, such as office of immigrant affairs, so that they may perform the aforementioned outreach. These offices are often in the best position to work with and understand the needs of the immigrant community, making them and their partners in the nonprofit space an important piece to leverage in outreach.

The application for citizenship — even with vast improvements — may always feel daunting and long. While simplifying and improving the application itself is critical, there are also ways to break down an arduous experience such as the N-400 into a digestible series of achievable goals. While it would be ideal for USCIS to improve the application experience, there are measures other groups can take in making the form easier to complete.

Most think the N-400 is extremely complex even if they are able to apply without assistance. As we saw from testing, all participants found a checklist and reminder system to be extremely valuable. Tools designed to help the applicant quickly understand the breadth of the application while promoting them to focus on one task or section at a time could help reduce anxiety at the onset and throughout applying. If possible, these tools could also help applicants pre-populate information from their own personal accounts or documents to input on the form. Additionally, many testers suggested additional features linking the checklist to actual form submission or direct interaction with USCIS as desired.

“I would use it, it's friendly, reminding me with kindness that this process can be done. I love that someone is thinking about this, creating an app for me as an immigrant, that's fabulous. It's a more enthusiastic way to go through the immigration process.” Interviewee 8

Additionally, features that found help in one’s city and provided centralized access to credible advice were highly rated. More surprisingly, multiple testers noted an organizational tool could replace the need for a lawyer who was hired to avoid errors as opposed to those who were hired to overcome substantial legal issues.

“Keeping goals, track of what gets done, I was doing that manually on paper before. Would def used it if it existed.” Interviewee 2

“I wouldn't have needed a lawyer if I had this for GC. It'd be a great way to not miss something. For visa apps or citizenship.” Interviewee 7“Lawyers aren't very good at providing support. They weren't always there to explain things to me, why they need certain info, if I have this app I can ask other people about it.” Interviewee 13

Features that allow applicants to compare their citizenship timeline and experiences with others' (keeping privacy in mind) creates reassuring communal insight. This makes comparing one’s experience easier, and gives applicants a sense of how normal their timing is and whether they need to contact immigration or request additional help.

“You need information about the interview, what they’ll ask you, and how they’ll ask you. You need support for sure. Not sure if other people have that, so it could be very good for other people to have resources they can gather.” Interviewee 8

Tools that support organization and tiered steps to the application itself will most likely not replace current modes of assistance, but could be very powerful in conjunction with lawyers or nonprofits, or to fill the gap for individuals unable to access these resources.