In the past year, employers and F-1 students alike have seen a noticeable increase in USCIS Requests for Evidence (RFEs) focused specifically on OPT and STEM OPT compliance. These RFEs are no longer limited to technical form issues; they increasingly probe whether a student truly maintained lawful F-1 status throughout the OPT or STEM OPT period. At the same time, the immigration landscape has shifted dramatically with the introduction of the $100,000 H-1B fee framework and the heightened importance of proving continuous lawful status in any H-1B change of status filing. Together, these developments send a clear message: maintaining thorough, contemporaneous documentation of OPT and STEM OPT compliance is no longer merely best practice; it is essential risk management for both employees and employers.

OPT and STEM OPT Are Ongoing Compliance Regimes

OPT and STEM OPT participation is not passive. F-1 students must continuously demonstrate that they are engaging in qualifying employment, that they are reporting changes in a timely manner, and that their work aligns with the regulatory purpose of practical training in their field of study. Employers, in turn, take on specific obligations under the STEM OPT framework that go well beyond simply offering a job. USCIS now expects to see evidence that these obligations are being taken seriously and carried out in practice.

What was once treated by many as a largely administrative program has become a focal point of adjudicatory scrutiny. Officers are increasingly looking beyond the surface of filings to determine whether the regulatory structure of OPT and STEM OPT is being honored in substance.

The I-983 as an Active Training and Oversight Framework

Nowhere is this more evident than in the scrutiny surrounding the Form I-983 Training Plan. Page 3 of the I-983 is a set of concrete representations to the U.S. government about how the employer will train, supervise, and evaluate the student. The employer attests that it will provide structured learning objectives, that the student will receive oversight and guidance from experienced staff, and that the company will measure the student’s progress using defined methods. When USCIS later requests evidence of STEM OPT compliance, adjudicators are increasingly asking whether those statements were actually implemented.

In practice, this means employers and students should not treat the I-983 as a one-time filing exercise. The training plan should be a living document that reflects the student’s real-world role. If the student’s job duties evolve, if the supervisor changes, if the worksite changes, or if the nature of the training materially shifts, the I-983 must be updated and re-signed. Just as importantly, the employer should retain documentation showing that the oversight and assessment mechanisms described on page 3 are being carried out.

This can include records of regular check-ins, performance evaluations, mentoring sessions, project reviews, training materials, and internal feedback mechanisms. Notes from supervisory meetings, internal progress reports, and written evaluations can all serve as powerful evidence that the employer is actively providing the structured training promised in the form.

Compensation and the Legitimacy of OPT Employment

Another area of increasing scrutiny is whether OPT and STEM OPT employment is bona fide, and whether it is appropriately compensated. For STEM OPT, the rules are clear: students must be paid, and they must be paid in a manner commensurate with similarly situated U.S. workers. Unpaid STEM OPT positions are not permitted. USCIS now routinely looks for offer letters, payroll records, and other proof that the employment is real, ongoing, and consistent with the attestations in the I-983.

Even during the initial 12-month OPT period, where unpaid internships are technically allowed, USCIS is increasingly examining whether an unpaid arrangement was truly appropriate. Officers are asking whether the role is the type of work that would ordinarily be unpaid in the U.S. labor market. If the student is performing core business functions or occupying what looks like a standard entry-level professional role, an unpaid arrangement may be viewed as inconsistent with the purpose of OPT.

Legitimate unpaid OPT arrangements are generally limited to true training environments: structured internships with clear educational objectives, close supervision, and a focus on learning rather than production, often in nonprofit, research, or academic-adjacent settings. When the work mirrors what paid employees ordinarily do, the risk increases. Maintaining documentation explaining the training nature of the role, and, where applicable, payroll records, can be decisive when USCIS later evaluates whether the student truly maintained lawful status.

What USCIS Is Looking For in RFEs

USCIS RFEs increasingly seek the underlying proof of real-world compliance. Officers are no longer satisfied with seeing that an I-983 exists; they want evidence that the student’s experience matches the representations made. This now commonly includes requests for signed I-983s and updates, records of supervision and evaluations, SEVP reporting confirmations, and proof of compensation.

Pay documentation has also become a frequent focal point. RFEs often ask for offer letters, pay statements, or other evidence showing that STEM OPT workers are being paid and that any OPT employment, especially unpaid arrangements, was legitimate. When an employer can produce contemporaneous records demonstrating supervision, training, progress assessments, and appropriate compensation, an RFE becomes far easier to resolve. Without these materials, even compliant employers and students may find themselves struggling to reconstruct a defensible record after the fact.

 The H-1B Connection: Why This Matters More Than Ever

This heightened scrutiny takes on even greater significance in light of the current H-1B environment. While the $100,000 H-1B fee does not apply to change of status filings for individuals already in the United States, that benefit depends entirely on the beneficiary being in valid status at the time of filing. Any question about whether an F-1 student properly maintained OPT or STEM OPT status can undermine a change of status request.

Gaps in reporting, unclear employment histories, or weak documentation of STEM compliance can trigger delays, RFEs, or denials that place both the employee and employer in a precarious position. What might once have been treated as a minor technical issue can now have outsized consequences for a worker’s ability to remain in the United States without triggering consular processing and exposure to the new $100,000 fee.

Building a Record That Protects the Future

For students, this means treating every reporting obligation and training milestone as part of a larger immigration record that may one day be scrutinized in a future petition. For employers, it means recognizing that hosting a STEM OPT worker carries compliance responsibilities that extend beyond onboarding. Maintaining a well-organized compliance file, including I-983s, updates, evaluations, and internal records of supervision and training, is an investment in future immigration stability.

If you would like an individualized assessment of your H-1B compliance risks, whether as an employer or employee, Reddy Neumann Brown P.C. can help you evaluate your options and avoid scenarios that could trigger the additional fee.

By: Rebecca Chen

Rebecca Chen is a Partner at Reddy Neumann Brown P.C. Her representation includes advising clients throughout the nonimmigrant and immigrant visa application process, from initial filing, responding to various requests for evidence, and processing at overseas consulates. Her years of experience in the immigration field have made her a knowledgeable resource for complex business immigration matters.