Who Oversees CPT Status
Whether a student's CPT is lawful is not decided by USCIS, the school, or the employer alone. Each covers one stage. Beyond those three, there is a regulator people often overlook: SEVP.
- The school's DSO authorizes it: CPT is authorized by the school's Designated School Official (DSO), not by USCIS.
- SEVP oversees schools: SEVP, part of ICE, certifies schools and checks whether DSOs authorize CPT according to the regulations.
- USCIS reviews it later: USCIS does not authorize CPT, but it reviews that CPT when the student later applies for OPT, H-1B, or a green card.
- The employer stays within the I-20: it verifies the CPT I-20 for Form I-9 at hire, then employs the student only within what the I-20 says.
- The student carries final responsibility for their own status: in the case law, the issuer's approval does not protect the student afterward. What decides the outcome is what the student knew and what the student said.
At a glance
| Party | When it steps in | What it is responsible for | Legal basis |
|---|---|---|---|
| School DSO | Before each CPT period begins | Decides whether the training is integral to the curriculum and directly related to the major; records employer, location, dates, and full- or part-time in SEVIS | 8 CFR 214.2(f)(10)(i) |
| SEVP (ICE) | Certification, recertification, out-of-cycle review | Checks whether schools and DSOs follow the rules; can withdraw a school's certification | 8 CFR 214.3, 214.4 |
| USCIS | When the student next applies to it | Decides OPT eligibility and whether the student maintained status | 8 CFR 214.2(f)(10)(i), 248.1(b) |
| Employer | At hire and during employment | Verifies the CPT I-20 for Form I-9; employs the student only within the I-20; honors its agreement with the school | USCIS M-274 section 7.4.2, 8 U.S.C. 1324a |
| Student | Throughout | Requests authorization from the DSO, starts work only after receiving the I-20, does only the authorized work | 8 CFR 214.1(e) |
The school's DSO: the only party that can authorize CPT
The authority to authorize CPT sits with the school, not USCIS. The USCIS Policy Manual says:
No application to USCIS for employment authorization or an Employment Authorization Document (EAD) (Form I-766) is required, but the student must request authorization for CPT from the student's Designated School Official (DSO).
The DSO decides two things: whether the training is an integral part of an established curriculum, and whether it is directly related to the student's major. Once approved, the DSO records it in SEVIS and signs the I-20. 8 CFR 214.2(f)(10)(i):
To grant authorization for a student to engage in curricular practical training, a DSO will update the student's record in SEVIS as being authorized for curricular practical training that is directly related to the student's major area of study. The DSO will indicate whether the training is full-time or part-time, the employer and location, and the employment start and end date.
So one CPT authorization covers one employer and one date range. Changing employers or extending the dates both need a new authorization from the DSO.
The DSO's signature carries legal liability. In August 2026 SEVP reminded DSOs (Broadcast Message 2608-01) that CPT authorizations failing the "integral to the curriculum" requirement were on the rise, and that a wrong authorization exposes both the school and the individual DSO:
When you sign or re-sign the Form I-20, "Certificate of Eligibility for Nonimmigrant Student Status," to authorize CPT, you are certifying under penalty of perjury that all information is true and correct to the best of your knowledge. This includes confirming that CPT is required or otherwise integral to the student's curriculum. Potential liability: Improper CPT authorization, such as for non-integral purposes, may subject both the institution and individual DSO to administrative or legal consequences.
Schools can also add their own requirements beyond the regulations, such as a CPT agreement signed by the employer, re-authorization every term, or continuous employment from the first day of enrollment. See Day 1 CPT schools that require continuous employment (in Chinese).
SEVP: overseeing schools and DSOs
SEVP (the Student and Exchange Visitor Program) is part of ICE and decides which schools may enroll F-1 students. SEVP reviews a school when it applies for certification or recertification, and can also run an out-of-cycle review between certifications.
If a school or its DSO breaks the rules, SEVP can withdraw the school's certification. Two of the grounds listed in 8 CFR 214.4(a)(2) bear directly on CPT:
(v) Willful issuance by a DSO of a false statement, including wrongful certification of a statement by signature, in connection with a student's school transfer or application for employment or practical training.
(vi) Conduct on the part of a DSO that does not comply with the regulations.
Criminal enforcement is handled by HSI, also part of ICE. In the 2019 University of Farmington case, HSI set up a fake university of its own and used CPT as bait to catch recruiters and students. See University of Farmington case.
USCIS: does not authorize CPT, but looks back at it
USCIS plays no part in authorizing CPT. It steps in when the student next applies to it:
Applying for OPT: a student with one year or more of full-time CPT can no longer get post-completion OPT at the same degree level. The USCIS Policy Manual:
An F-1 student who has received 1 year or more of full-time CPT is ineligible for post-completion OPT at the same educational level.
Applying for an H-1B change of status, a green card, and so on: USCIS examines whether the student maintained lawful status. Under 8 CFR 214.1(e), unauthorized employment is a failure to maintain status:
Any unauthorized employment by a nonimmigrant constitutes a failure to maintain status within the meaning of section 241(a)(1)(C)(i) of the Act.
8 CFR 248.1(b) adds that an applicant who failed to maintain their previous status generally cannot be granted a change of status.
So starting work before CPT is authorized, working past the I-20 dates, or working for an employer not on the I-20 can all surface at this point. The review happens after the fact, not at the time of the work. See the retroactive-review article (in Chinese).
The employer: verify at hire, stay within the I-20
In the regulations, a CPT employer takes part through a cooperative agreement with the school ("offered by sponsoring employers through cooperative agreements with the school"). The employer does not authorize CPT and does not decide whether the training is integral to the curriculum; that is the DSO's job. The employer is responsible in three places:
- Form I-9 verification at hire: review the CPT I-20, confirm every Employment Authorization field is filled in, and reverify before the CPT ends. See Form I-9 onboarding verification (in Chinese).
- Employ only within what the I-20 says: the employer name, the dates, and full- or part-time status all follow the I-20. Continuing to employ someone the employer knows no longer has work authorization violates 8 U.S.C. 1324a(a)(2).
- Honor the agreement with the school: if the school requires a signed CPT agreement or an offer letter, provide it as agreed. For the documents Atomeocean provides as an employer, see Atomeocean CPT employer information (in Chinese).
Unlike STEM OPT, the federal regulations give a CPT employer no duty to report to the school. A STEM OPT employer commits on Form I-983 to report a student's departure to the school within five business days; whether a CPT employer reports anything, and what, depends on its agreement with the school.
The duty also runs the other way: schools answer for the employers they choose. SEVP's second notice in August 2026 (Broadcast Message 2608-02) says:
Schools should only enter into cooperative agreements with legitimate, bona fide employers who are able to provide a quality practical training experience to students.
The student: the status is ultimately the student's own
- Authorization first, then work: request it from the DSO and start only after receiving the signed CPT I-20. 8 CFR 214.2(f)(10)(i): "A student may begin curricular practical training only after receiving their Form I-20 or successor form with the DSO endorsement."
- Do only the authorized work: work only for the employer on the I-20 and only within its dates. To change employers or extend, go to the DSO first.
- Tell the employer about changes promptly: once a new CPT I-20 is signed, give it to the employer so it can reverify Form I-9 on time.
Case law: who answers for what when something goes wrong
The most important finding from the enforcement cases and court decisions reviewed: the issuer's approval does not protect the student. Whether the original approval came from the DSO (CPT) or from USCIS (the OPT EAD), once fraud is found later, USCIS treats that approval as a benefit the student obtained by fraud. What decides the student's outcome is what the student knew at the time and what the student said.
| Party | Held responsible when | Not pursued, or treated as deceived, when | Cases |
|---|---|---|---|
| Issuer: the DSO | Signed knowing the documents were false: prosecuted personally | A school deceived by an employer was not a defendant | Tri-Valley, Herguan, Findream |
| School (institution) | Its responsible official went wrong: certification withdrawn | — | Herguan |
| Employer | A shell employer that signed fake offer letters, employment verifications, or Forms I-983; staffing firms and recruiters that took part in the fraud | No company that simply hosted CPT students has been pursued in the primary sources | Findream, UNNJ, Farmington |
| SEVP / ICE | — | The enforcer: terminates students' SEVIS records in bulk | Tri-Valley, UNNJ, Farmington |
| USCIS | — | The deceived party in the criminal case; later, the party that finds fraud when reviewing the student's applications | Findream |
| Student | Their own statements were false, or they knew: found to have made a willful misrepresentation in a later application, years afterward, with courts largely unable to review | Students who verified the employer and handled problems honestly were found not to have committed fraud by the AAO; documents the school created are not charged to the student | Findream, AAO decisions, UNNJ |
Where there is no case law yet: no court decision or AAO decision was found that rules on whether CPT itself was lawful, for example whether Day 1 CPT counts as "integral to the curriculum".
All cases are listed in F-1 Enforcement Cases.