Worksheet · Employment Immigration

EB-1A Evidence Inventory Worksheet (with EB-2 Mapping)

Map every exhibit to the criteria, the context that gives it weight, and the EB-2 route as a fallback.

By Lincoln Square Law · 8-minute read

🖨 Print this checklist

An extraordinary ability petition is an argument, and the evidence is what the argument is made of. Petitions rarely fail for lack of material. They fail because the material was gathered without a map, so that the criteria are met on paper while the record never shows why any of it matters. This worksheet organizes a candidate’s evidence against the ten EB-1A criteria in 8 C.F.R. 204.5(h)(3), then against the final merits question, and finally against the EB-2 criteria in case the better route turns out to be a national interest waiver. Complete it before anyone drafts a petition letter.

Recognition evidence

• National or international awards: rules, judges, and number of winners.
• Memberships requiring outstanding achievement: bylaws and admission criteria.
• Published material about you: copy, date, author, outlet, and translation.
• Judging the work of others: proof that you actually judged.
• High remuneration: pay records and comparable salary surveys.

Work and impact evidence

• Original contributions: use by others, licensing, adoption, or independent citation.
• Scholarly articles: complete list with the standing of each venue.
• Artistic exhibitions or showcases, if applicable.
• Leading or critical role: position, organization reputation, and results.
• Commercial success in the performing arts: box office or sales.

Context for the final merits step

• Selection rate for each award and standing of each outlet.
• Citations compared with field norms, not raw counts.
• Independent sources confirming each major achievement.
• Recent evidence showing the acclaim continues.

Filing documents

• Degrees and evaluations of foreign credentials.
• Certified translations of any foreign-language document.
• Proof you will continue your work in the U.S.: letters, contracts, or a plan.
• Passport and current immigration history.

How to use the inventory

List every item of evidence once, in a simple table or spreadsheet, and give each item four entries: the criterion it supports, the document that proves it, the independent source that corroborates it, and a note on its significance in the field. An item that supports more than one criterion should be listed under each, with a note explaining the different point it makes in each place. Rate each item as strong, adequate, or weak, and be honest about the rating. A petition built on three strong criteria usually does better than one built on six adequate ones.

The first step of the review, under Kazarian v. USCIS, 596 F.3d 1115 (9th Cir. 2010), asks only whether the evidence meets the plain terms of at least three criteria. The second step asks whether the record as a whole shows sustained national or international acclaim and a place among the small percentage at the top of the field. The USCIS Policy Manual states that meeting the criteria at the first step does not by itself establish eligibility, and the Fifth Circuit agreed in Amin v. Mayorkas, 24 F.4th 383 (5th Cir. 2022). The inventory should therefore record what each item proves at both steps.

Rating each criterion

The Policy Manual resolves several questions that affect the ratings:

• Awards. A team award can qualify when each member is individually recognized, for example by receiving a medal or being named in the announcement. Record who competes, how winners are chosen, and how many receive the award.
• Membership. The association must require outstanding achievement, judged by recognized experts. Paid or open membership does not qualify. Keep the bylaws or admission criteria.
• Published material. An article on a broader topic can count if it discusses the candidate’s work substantially and names the candidate. Record the publication’s circulation or audience and include translations.
• Judging. Invitations are not enough. Keep proof that the candidate actually reviewed or judged, such as review confirmations or panel records.
• Original contributions. Funding, patents, or publication alone do not establish major significance. Record evidence of use by others, such as adoption, licensing, independent citation, or changes in practice.
• Leading or critical role. Show both the role and the organization’s distinguished reputation, and describe what the candidate’s work changed there.
• High remuneration. Pair pay records with compensation surveys for the same geography and position.

Where a criterion does not readily apply to the occupation, comparable evidence may be offered (8 C.F.R. 204.5(h)(4)). Note in the inventory why the criterion does not fit before listing the substitute.

Items that usually rate weak

Some evidence appears in many petitions and rarely carries weight on its own:

• Local awards. Prizes limited to one employer, university, or student competition rarely show national or international recognition.
• The candidate’s own writing. Articles the candidate wrote belong under scholarly articles, not under published material about the candidate.
• Unfinished judging. Invitations to review without proof the review was completed.
• Raw numbers. Citation totals, downloads, or followers presented without the norms of the field.
• Unsupported claims. Contributions described in letters that no document confirms.

Building the context file

Most of the work for the second step is context. For each strong item, collect a short set of documents that an officer unfamiliar with the field could use to judge its weight: the selection rate for an award, the standing of a journal or conference, the citation norms of the subfield, the reputation of an organization, or the market data behind a salary. Citation counts should be compared with the field rather than presented as raw numbers. Context should come from independent sources wherever possible, because the Policy Manual directs officers to consider the relationship between a witness and the candidate when weighing statements of support.

Sustained and current acclaim

Acclaim must be sustained. The Policy Manual notes that the term does not imply an age limit, but a record with little recent evidence may suggest that the acclaim has not continued. Mark each item with its date. If most of the strongest evidence is several years old, identify what recent work, recognition, or roles can show that the candidate’s standing continues, and gather that evidence before filing.

Continuing work and prospective benefit

The petition must show clear evidence that the candidate is coming to continue work in the area of expertise (8 C.F.R. 204.5(h)(5)). Useful evidence includes letters from prospective employers, contracts, offers, or a detailed statement of plans with supporting documents. The statute also requires that the entry substantially benefit the United States prospectively (INA 203(b)(1)(A)(iii)). The inventory should link the planned work to the field in which the acclaim was earned. A change of field weakens both points.

If the better route is EB-2

Some candidates meet three EB-1A criteria but will struggle at the final merits step. Their evidence may still support an EB-2 petition with a national interest waiver. Map the same inventory against the EB-2 threshold: an advanced degree or its equivalent, or exceptional ability shown by at least three of six criteria in 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(ii), such as an academic record, ten years of full-time experience, a license, a salary showing exceptional ability, professional memberships, and recognition for achievements. Then map it against the three prongs of Matter of Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016). Evidence of impact, progress, and interest from others does double duty in both classifications.

Before the petition is drafted

When the inventory is complete, read it as the officer will. Confirm that at least three criteria are rated strong on their plain terms, that every strong item has independent context, that recent evidence shows the acclaim continues, and that the planned work in the United States is documented. Any foreign-language document needs a complete English translation certified by a competent translator (8 C.F.R. 103.2(b)(3)). Gaps found now can often be closed with a few months of targeted work. Gaps found in a denial usually mean starting over.