Geography / State

Oklahoma

Employers in Oklahoma submitted 24,968 certified H-1B applications requesting 39,249 workers across 3,945 companies. The median offered wage is $67,870/yr. The largest filers are Wipro Limited, Mphasis Corporation and Deloitte Consulting LLP. The displacement model assigns 49.8K worker-equivalent exposures to these filings.

Data current as of Sep 2, 2026

Workers requested

39.2K

Requests on filings, not hires

Median offered wage

$67.9K

Annual, certified filings

Below prevailing

0.01%

Share of 23.2K filings with a wage on record

Latest year

323

Calendar 2026 · peak 2015 at 2K

Americans displaced (modeled estimate)

49,755

The math
Base (1 per certified worker)
+39,249
Wage-gap multiplier

17361 of 24968 filings below BLS median

+10,506
Total49,755

Σ workers×(1+wage_gap) + Σ WARN layoffs. The 1.0 base rate per certified H-1B worker request is a site model assumption. Wage gap multiplier = (BLS median − offered wage) / BLS median, applied only to filings offering less than the BLS median. Related research provides context, not validation of these exact coefficients. This is a modeled estimate, not a count of actual displacements.

Exposure method v1.2 · This is a modeled worker-equivalent count.

Inside the state

Where inside the state the activity concentrates.
Loading map…

Counties by filings (71)

1Oklahoma 8,629
2Tulsa 6,216
3Cleveland 2,334
4Washington 1,623
5Payne 1,039
6Carter 494
7Comanche 370
8Bryan 310

Modeled consequences

Estimates scaled from the modeled displacement figure above. Not observed outcomes.

Modeled consequence estimates

Conditional impacts associated with modeled displacement

Explore Oklahoma’s scenarioEarnings · children · health · adjust the worker count

These are conditional population estimates scaled from Oklahoma's current modeled displacement count. They are not observed outcomes, a prediction about any person, or evidence that this entity caused displacement.

Exposure method v1.2 (stored with this aggregate) · benchmarked to the latest BLS survey. Consequence parameters v1.52; build v1.52+engine0.4.0+99173fbf23e75037da3fb9b4a9017a1e56909260ccb112f9902bc5ac86242153+national-reference1

Excess deaths over 20 years

Illustrative reference calculation · population applicability is not established

1,430.89

Range: 560.35 to 2,492.5

20-year reference scenario: high-seniority male displacement effect. This is not an expected count for an unknown population.

Source-profile mortality point (deaths)
1,430.88762316
No sustained excess from year 7 (deaths)
1,021.13726612

Declared structural comparison; not a confidence interval or a model probability.

Baseline population: US prime-age men (45-54).

Child lifetime earnings lost

Illustrative reference calculation · population applicability is not established

$23.8B

Range: $6.2B to $40.2B

Canadian father–son firm-closure effect, applied to a US male lifetime-earnings baseline in 2024 dollars. The reference result uses 2 children per worker.

Baseline population: US male median lifetime earnings.

The mortality effect comes from a high-seniority male study cohort. Treat the count as a reference scenario unless the population matches. A mixed population needs a reviewed transport rule.

The range is the engine's parameter-support envelope: it varies declared parameters only and adds none of the exposure input's uncertainty.

The math, limits, and citations

Illustrative reference calculation scaled by the supplied worker-equivalent exposure. Two children per worker; 20-year mortality follow-up. This does not establish that an entity caused these outcomes.

Input SHA-256: 65625244b6014b6429cf6d6fd7f3f525fdafb6dce287e996ad1a82b5db273d17

Excess deaths over 20 years: {"status":"illustrative_reference_calculation","eligible_for_public_headline":false,"target_population":null,"decision":null,"transport_assumptions":["high-tenure male mass-layoff cohort, ages 45–54","Pennsylvania early-1980s response transported to target place and calendar time","fixed baseline age rate over follow-up; cohort aging is not modeled"],"reason":"Target cohort applicability and transport have not been established for this outcome; display as an illustrative reference calculation."}

Child lifetime earnings lost: {"status":"illustrative_reference_calculation","eligible_for_public_headline":false,"target_population":null,"decision":null,"transport_assumptions":["Canadian father-son firm-closure estimate transported to the target families","US male synthetic career earnings convert a relative adult earnings effect to dollars","lifetime dollars are undiscounted; this is not an annual loss"],"reason":"Target cohort applicability and transport have not been established for this outcome; display as an illustrative reference calculation."}

Projection eligibility: {"child":{"status":"direct_estimate","eligible_for_validated_direct_contrast":true,"reason":"direct displacement-to-child adult earnings estimate; transport still requires an applicability decision"},"grandchild":{"status":"structural_projection","eligible_for_validated_direct_contrast":false,"reason":"combines a direct child estimate with an intergenerational persistence assumption; not an identified displacement intervention effect"},"greatgrandchild":{"status":"structural_projection","eligible_for_validated_direct_contrast":false,"reason":"repeats an intergenerational persistence assumption beyond the identification core"}}

Exposure source: {"source":"one-worker normalized reference input","method":"scale by the stored warehouse worker-equivalent exposure at read time"}

Exact values: excess deaths over 20 years 1,430.88762316 (range 560.353874705 to 2,492.50171562); child lifetime earnings lost $23,827,324,431.44 (range $6,188,915,436.74 to $40,227,950,338.79);

The displayed range is a parameter-support envelope, not a confidence interval.

Place reference: national reference.

Not included: exposure estimation error; baseline estimation error; unmodeled pathways.

Blocked model paths: local_service_jobs_lost: requires a documented net local loss of tradable jobs; worker displacement alone is not this exposure.

  • Excess deaths over 20 years: sullivan2009 (earnings_shock->mortality_peak; canonical) Study population: US high-seniority displaced men born 1930-1959.
  • Excess deaths over 20 years: sullivan2009 (earnings_shock->mortality_offset_1; canonical) Study population: US high-seniority displaced men born 1930-1959.
  • Excess deaths over 20 years: sullivan2009 (earnings_shock->mortality_offsets_2_3; canonical) Study population: US high-seniority displaced men born 1930-1959.
  • Excess deaths over 20 years: sullivan2009 (earnings_shock->mortality_offsets_4_5; canonical) Study population: US high-seniority displaced men born 1930-1959.
  • Excess deaths over 20 years: sullivan2009 (earnings_shock->mortality_sustained; canonical) Study population: US high-seniority displaced men born 1930-1959.
  • Child lifetime earnings lost: oreopoulos2008 (displacement->child_earnings; EXACT) Study population: Canada 39k father-son pairs firm closures.
Scenario assumptions, sensitivity and source records

Outcome statistics use the displayed exposure. Baselines, coefficients, annual family schedules and component records retain their source normalization.

{
  "displayed_workers": 49754.898,
  "source_normalization_workers": 1,
  "applicability": {
    "excess_deaths": {
      "status": "illustrative_reference_calculation",
      "eligible_for_public_headline": false,
      "target_population": null,
      "decision": null,
      "transport_assumptions": [
        "high-tenure male mass-layoff cohort, ages 45–54",
        "Pennsylvania early-1980s response transported to target place and calendar time",
        "fixed baseline age rate over follow-up; cohort aging is not modeled"
      ],
      "reason": "Target cohort applicability and transport have not been established for this outcome; display as an illustrative reference calculation."
    },
    "child_lifetime_earnings_lost_usd": {
      "status": "illustrative_reference_calculation",
      "eligible_for_public_headline": false,
      "target_population": null,
      "decision": null,
      "transport_assumptions": [
        "Canadian father-son firm-closure estimate transported to the target families",
        "US male synthetic career earnings convert a relative adult earnings effect to dollars",
        "lifetime dollars are undiscounted; this is not an annual loss"
      ],
      "reason": "Target cohort applicability and transport have not been established for this outcome; display as an illustrative reference calculation."
    }
  },
  "target_population": null,
  "projection_eligibility": {
    "child": {
      "status": "direct_estimate",
      "eligible_for_validated_direct_contrast": true,
      "reason": "direct displacement-to-child adult earnings estimate; transport still requires an applicability decision"
    },
    "grandchild": {
      "status": "structural_projection",
      "eligible_for_validated_direct_contrast": false,
      "reason": "combines a direct child estimate with an intergenerational persistence assumption; not an identified displacement intervention effect"
    },
    "greatgrandchild": {
      "status": "structural_projection",
      "eligible_for_validated_direct_contrast": false,
      "reason": "repeats an intergenerational persistence assumption beyond the identification core"
    }
  },
  "child_applicability": {
    "source": "oreopoulos2008",
    "source_age_at_displacement": [
      10,
      14
    ],
    "source_child_sex": "Male",
    "source_parent_sex": "Male",
    "source_geography": "Canada",
    "source_event": "father firm closure 1980-1982",
    "target_child_profiles": null,
    "incompatible_children": [],
    "unknown_children": [],
    "source_income_quartile": null,
    "income_rank_definition": null,
    "eligible_for_reviewed_transport": false,
    "status": "unknown",
    "limitations": [
      "No response curve across child ages is identified by this narrow cohort.",
      "Income groups refer to father's average pre-displacement income in 1978-1979; target rank mapping requires a transport argument.",
      "A subgroup's nonsignificant coefficient is retained with its uncertainty, not replaced with zero."
    ]
  },
  "child_valuation": null,
  "assumptions": {
    "mortality_method": "odds_survival",
    "mortality_timing": "Source-offset profile: displacement, +1, +2–3, +4–5, and +6+; displacement is follow-up year 1, so offset +6 begins in follow-up year 7. Annual baseline rates use a constant-hazard rate-to-risk conversion; odds ratios modify annual risk, and survival compounds across phases. The selected baseline age rate is held fixed over the follow-up horizon.",
    "mortality_contract": {
      "method": "odds_survival",
      "timing": "source_profile",
      "baseline_conversion": "1-exp(-annual_rate)",
      "phases": [
        {
          "phase": "displacement",
          "start_offset": 0,
          "duration_years": 1,
          "first_follow_up_year": 1
        },
        {
          "phase": "offset_1",
          "start_offset": 1,
          "duration_years": 1,
          "first_follow_up_year": 2
        },
        {
          "phase": "offsets_2_3",
          "start_offset": 2,
          "duration_years": 2,
          "first_follow_up_year": 3
        },
        {
          "phase": "offsets_4_5",
          "start_offset": 4,
          "duration_years": 2,
          "first_follow_up_year": 5
        },
        {
          "phase": "offset_6_plus",
          "start_offset": 6,
          "duration_years": null,
          "first_follow_up_year": 7
        }
      ],
      "description": "Source-offset profile: displacement, +1, +2–3, +4–5, and +6+; displacement is follow-up year 1, so offset +6 begins in follow-up year 7. Annual baseline rates use a constant-hazard rate-to-risk conversion; odds ratios modify annual risk, and survival compounds across phases. The selected baseline age rate is held fixed over the follow-up horizon."
    },
    "place_application": "initial_only",
    "place_counterfactual": "national child-dollar result is the reference"
  },
  "exposure_provenance": {
    "source": "one-worker normalized reference input",
    "method": "scale by the stored warehouse worker-equivalent exposure at read time"
  },
  "place": null,
  "place_mix": [],
  "input_content_sha256": "65625244b6014b6429cf6d6fd7f3f525fdafb6dce287e996ad1a82b5db273d17",
  "engine_version": "0.4.0",
  "engine_sha256": "99173fbf23e75037da3fb9b4a9017a1e56909260ccb112f9902bc5ac86242153",
  "adapter_sha256": "605700852536cef19bdae955f055979ab182f352c107882e7b46fb6cccd3e68e",
  "outcomes": {
    "excess_deaths": {
      "point": 1430.887623155231,
      "low": 560.3538747051858,
      "high": 2492.50171562469,
      "unit": "deaths",
      "baseline": {
        "value": 0.004944,
        "annual_probability": 0.004931798548274205,
        "unit": "deaths_per_person_year",
        "citation": "cdc_wonder D76 (Underlying Cause of Death, 1999-2020), Male 45-54 years, pooled 2015-2019: 514314 deaths / 104024440 person-years = 494.4 per 100k; pulled 2026-09-06 via scraper.cli wonder-mortality into warehouse wonder_mortality",
        "population": "US prime-age men (45-54)",
        "notes": "Pre-pandemic window: excludes 2020 (COVID-distorted; 2020 crude rate 601.5/100k). Single-year 2019 = 490.0/100k. Ages 45-54 match the Sullivan & von Wachter prime-age counterfactual population",
        "sex": "Male",
        "age": "45-54 years",
        "years": "2015-2019",
        "cause": "All causes",
        "geography": "US"
      },
      "steps": [
        {
          "link": "earnings_shock->mortality_peak",
          "phase": "displacement",
          "point": 2.6698,
          "low": 2.1144,
          "high": 3.3711,
          "citation": "sullivan2009",
          "tier": "canonical",
          "population_scope": "US high-seniority displaced men born 1930-1959",
          "evidence_role": "conditional"
        },
        {
          "link": "earnings_shock->mortality_offset_1",
          "phase": "offset_1",
          "point": 1.9838,
          "low": 1.3697,
          "high": 2.8732,
          "citation": "sullivan2009",
          "tier": "canonical",
          "population_scope": "US high-seniority displaced men born 1930-1959",
          "evidence_role": "conditional"
        },
        {
          "link": "earnings_shock->mortality_offsets_2_3",
          "phase": "offsets_2_3",
          "point": 1.7315,
          "low": 1.3238,
          "high": 2.2649,
          "citation": "sullivan2009",
          "tier": "canonical",
          "population_scope": "US high-seniority displaced men born 1930-1959",
          "evidence_role": "conditional"
        },
        {
          "link": "earnings_shock->mortality_offsets_4_5",
          "phase": "offsets_4_5",
          "point": 1.2712,
          "low": 0.97,
          "high": 1.6661,
          "citation": "sullivan2009",
          "tier": "canonical",
          "population_scope": "US high-seniority displaced men born 1930-1959",
          "evidence_role": "conditional"
        },
        {
          "link": "earnings_shock->mortality_sustained",
          "phase": "offset_6_plus",
          "point": 1.1354,
          "low": 1.0335,
          "high": 1.2474,
          "citation": "sullivan2009",
          "tier": "canonical",
          "population_scope": "US high-seniority displaced men born 1930-1959",
          "evidence_role": "conditional"
        }
      ],
      "components": {
        "follow_up_years": 20,
        "method": "odds_survival",
        "timing": "source_profile"
      },
      "applicability": {
        "status": "illustrative_reference_calculation",
        "eligible_for_public_headline": false,
        "target_population": null,
        "decision": null,
        "transport_assumptions": [
          "high-tenure male mass-layoff cohort, ages 45–54",
          "Pennsylvania early-1980s response transported to target place and calendar time",
          "fixed baseline age rate over follow-up; cohort aging is not modeled"
        ],
        "reason": "Target cohort applicability and transport have not been established for this outcome; display as an illustrative reference calculation."
      },
      "interpretation": "Conditional modeled expected difference; parameter bands are support envelopes, not a confidence interval.",
      "persistence_sensitivity": {
        "available": true,
        "status": "declared_structural_sensitivity",
        "eligible_for_public_headline": false,
        "unit": "deaths",
        "variants": {
          "source_profile": {
            "point": 1430.887623155231,
            "low": 560.3538747051858,
            "high": 2492.50171562469,
            "evidence_status": "source_profile_with_transport_assumptions",
            "citations": [
              "sullivan2009"
            ]
          },
          "no_sustained_excess": {
            "point": 1021.1372661160417,
            "low": 457.2905688762428,
            "high": 1759.396665698019,
            "evidence_status": "structural_assumption",
            "motivating_citations": [
              "eliasonstorrie2009"
            ],
            "assumption": "Retain source odds through offset +5; set offset +6 onward OR=1.",
            "first_changed_follow_up_year": 7,
            "fixed_late_odds_ratio": 1
          }
        },
        "source_minus_no_sustained_point": 409.75035703918945,
        "structural_point_range": {
          "low": 1021.1372661160417,
          "high": 1430.887623155231,
          "interpretation": "Range of point estimates across these two assumptions; not a confidence interval or a bound on the true effect."
        },
        "shared_inputs": [
          "exposure",
          "resolved mortality baseline",
          "follow-up horizon",
          "source odds through offset +5"
        ],
        "limitations": [
          "No probabilities or model-average weights are assigned to the structures.",
          "A nonsignificant long-run estimate does not establish an exactly zero effect.",
          "The Swedish study differs in population, design, effect scale and follow-up; this hybrid does not reproduce its estimates or substitute its hazard ratios for odds ratios.",
          "The cutoff follows the source profile's offset +6 phase, not the Swedish study's windows; persistence beyond its 12-year follow-up is an assumption in either direction.",
          "Baseline aging and target-population transport remain unresolved in both structures."
        ]
      }
    },
    "child_lifetime_earnings_lost_usd": {
      "point": 23827324431.439278,
      "low": 6188915436.737478,
      "high": 40227950338.79357,
      "steps": [
        {
          "link": "displacement->child_earnings",
          "kind": "direct",
          "citation": "oreopoulos2008",
          "tier": "EXACT",
          "param_point": 0.9076,
          "param_low": 0.844,
          "param_high": 0.976,
          "value_point": 0.9076,
          "value_low": 0.844,
          "value_high": 0.976,
          "causal_role": "direct_displacement_estimate",
          "population_scope": "Canada 39k father-son pairs firm closures",
          "evidence_role": "conditional"
        }
      ],
      "unit": "usd_2024",
      "baseline": {
        "value": 2591418,
        "unit": "usd_2024",
        "citation": "SSA Annual Statistical Supplement 2025, Table 4.B6 (CWHS/Master Earnings File, 1 percent sample): male median earnings by age, 2023 (preliminary) — synthetic career ages 20-64 = 5x(24218+42561+52485+60423+64962+67506+68160+64854)+2x60666+3x56666 = 2517175 usd_2023; CPI-U annual averages 304.702->313.689 (BLS series CUUR0000SA0, pulled 2026-09-06) -> 2591418 usd_2024; warehouse ssa_median_earnings (pulled via ssa-earnings-download)",
        "population": "US male median lifetime earnings",
        "notes": "Derivation declared: the cross-sectional age profile summed over a 45-year working life (ages 20-64) is a synthetic cohort — the sum of age-band medians approximates rather than equals the median of individual lifetime sums; median-of-workers semantics excludes non-working years; 2023 medians are preliminary (SSA replaces them with final data in a later edition)"
      },
      "applicability": {
        "status": "illustrative_reference_calculation",
        "eligible_for_public_headline": false,
        "target_population": null,
        "decision": null,
        "transport_assumptions": [
          "Canadian father-son firm-closure estimate transported to the target families",
          "US male synthetic career earnings convert a relative adult earnings effect to dollars",
          "lifetime dollars are undiscounted; this is not an annual loss"
        ],
        "reason": "Target cohort applicability and transport have not been established for this outcome; display as an illustrative reference calculation."
      },
      "interpretation": "Conditional modeled expected difference; parameter bands are support envelopes, not a confidence interval."
    }
  }
}

Parameter set v1.52 · model v1.52+engine0.4.0+99173fbf23e75037da3fb9b4a9017a1e56909260ccb112f9902bc5ac86242153+national-reference1

Employers & filings

Who files here, and the filings behind every number above.

Top employers (3,945)

EmployerFilings
1

University of Oklahoma

1,295
2

University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center

1,137
3

Oklahoma State University

973
4

Accenture LLP

508
5

Paycom Payroll, LLC

442
6

Larsen & Toubro Infotech Limited ⚠ Dep

439
7

Wipro Limited ⚠ Dep

406
8

MSCI, Inc.

351

5 largest employers account for 17% of the 24,968 filings attributed to 3,945 employers here (the records). See the ranking

Context & calculation notes how the share is built

Share = filings by the top 5 employers ÷ all filings in this geography with a resolved employer. Filings whose employer is not yet linked sit outside both numbers, so the denominator can be smaller than the geography's headline filing count.

The share describes this one geography. A high share is a concentration signal for inspection, not a finding about any employer.

Labor condition applications (26,742)

DOL filings BLS occupationsRecordAll recorded outcomes and visa classes. Open a case number for the source record.
Title · Worksite

A negative % sits below the BLS market median; a positive % sits above.

What the filing rows show One application per row

Each row links to the disclosure record. The wage badge compares an offer with available benchmarks; it is a screening calculation, not a finding of a wage violation.

Wages & occupations

What wages are being offered, against which benchmarks.

Wages

DOL wage offers BLS occupationsSignalEmployer-reported offers in disclosure records, not observed earnings.
Avg offered wageAvg prevailing wageBLS market median
$0$26,658$53,316$79,974$106,633$81,668Avg offered wage$65,525Avg prevailingwage$106,633BLS marketmedianannual wage

0.01% of the 23,153 filings with a wage on record offer below the employer's own prevailing wage. The prevailing wage is the floor the employer attested to, not a market benchmark.

Offered-wage distribution

Percentiles across 22,572 positive year-unit LCA offers, all outcomes and visa classes.

p10p25Medianp75p90
$41,500$53,498$68,500$90,000$125,144
Context & calculation notes wage sources and averages

Offered wages are employer-reported on the DOL record, annualized to year rates. Averages mix occupations and years: a geography-level average is a screening comparison, not a matched-role finding.

The BLS market median is the OES national median for the filing's occupation (latest available year). The prevailing wage is the employer's own attested floor. The two answer different questions and are not interchangeable.

The distribution covers positive offers with wage unit Year, across all outcomes and visa classes. It differs from the certified H-1B summary cohort. Hourly and other wage units are outside this distribution.

Definitions & methodology ↗

Wage gap by job category: H-1B vs BLS

13-2011 Accountants and AuditorsH-1B $57,678 vs BLS $83,680-31%

459 filings · $45.3M certified gap (est.)

15-1252 Software DevelopersH-1B $105,233 vs BLS $135,980-23%

703 filings · $24.1M certified gap (est.)

17-2072 Electronics Engineers, Except ComputerH-1B $75,523 vs BLS $130,220-42%

106 filings · $21.3M certified gap (est.)

13-1111 Management AnalystsH-1B $70,464 vs BLS $101,860-31%

207 filings · $18.8M certified gap (est.)

17-2141 Mechanical EngineersH-1B $81,883 vs BLS $104,110-21%

609 filings · $18.4M certified gap (est.)

19-1029 Biological Scientists, All OtherH-1B $51,439 vs BLS $98,920-48%

348 filings · $16.7M certified gap (est.)

29-1229 Physicians, All OtherH-1B $233,375 vs BLS $265,930-12%

247 filings · $16.5M certified gap (est.)

11-3021 Computer and Information Systems ManagersH-1B $138,097 vs BLS $175,140-21%

153 filings · $14.7M certified gap (est.)

Programs & time

What kinds of foreign-labor activity happen here, and how the volume moved.

Program mix

DOL OFLCRecordEach program counts a different record type. Rows are not additive.
DOL foreign-labor program filings in Oklahoma
ProgramRecordsShare of rows
H-1BLabor condition applications, certified slice24,96898.7%
H-1B1 (Chile)LCA sibling class, all recorded outcomes630.2%
H-1B1 (Singapore)LCA sibling class, all recorded outcomes290.1%
E-3 (Australia)LCA sibling class, all recorded outcomes2441%
Compare on a chart share of rows shown above
  • H-1B24,968 · 98.7%
  • H-1B1 (Chile)63 · 0.2%
  • H-1B1 (Singapore)29 · 0.1%
  • E-3 (Australia)244 · 1.0%

A filing, certification, or determination is a DOL record, not a visa issuance and not observed employment. Prevailing-wage determinations carry no county or ZIP on the source record.

Activity over time

DOL filingsRecordCalendar submission years 2007–2026. One row per filing.
05001K2K2K3K3K4KGreat recession: Employ American Workers Act (TARP recipients restricted): https://www.congress.gov/bill/111th-congress/house-bill/1Great recession: Employ Ame…Infosys pays record $34M visa-fraud settlement (ICE/DOJ): https://www.ice.gov/news/releases/indian-corporation-pays-record-34-million-fine-settle-allegations-systemic-visa-fraudInfosys pays record $34M vi…$4,000 H-1B "9/11 fee" on 50+ / >50% H-1B employers: https://www.uscis.gov/archive/new-law-increases-h-1b-and-l-1-petition-fees$4,000 H-1B "9/11 fee" on 5…Buy American, Hire American EO: https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/presidential-executive-order-buy-american-hire-american/Buy American, Hire American…USCIS suspends premium processing; site visits expand: https://www.uscis.gov/USCIS suspends premium proc…USCIS third-party worksite memo: denials spike: https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/USCIS/policymanual/updates/20180222.pdfUSCIS third-party worksite …June 2020 H-1B entry ban + Oct 2020 DOL prevailing-wage IFR: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/10/08/2020-22381/requirements-including-labor-certification-programs-for-permanent-employment-in-the-united-statesJune 2020 H-1B entry ban + …Biden revokes entry ban; denials normalize: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/02/05/2021-02469/revocation-of-presidential-proclamations-10014-and-10149Biden revokes entry ban; de…Trump introduces $100,000 payment for certain new H-1B petitions (Sept. 21): https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/09/restriction-on-entry-of-certain-nonimmigrant-workers/Trump introduces $100,000 p…Trump extends the $100,000 H-1B payment requirement through Sept. 21, 2027: https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/09/restriction-on-entry-of-certain-nonimmigrant-workers-faad/Trump extends the $100,000 …peak 2K (2015)2007: 186 filings (564 workers)2008: 1,462 filings (2,962 workers)2009: 923 filings (1,091 workers)2010: 323 filings (536 workers)2011: 1,483 filings (2,317 workers)2012: 1,404 filings (2,231 workers)2013: 1,532 filings (3,031 workers)2014: 1,762 filings (3,470 workers)2015: 1,960 filings (3,758 workers)2016: 1,815 filings (3,703 workers)2017: 1,601 filings (2,691 workers)2018: 1,835 filings (2,629 workers)2019: 1,717 filings (2,258 workers)2020: 1,355 filings (1,634 workers)2021: 1,377 filings (1,614 workers)2022: 1,357 filings (1,904 workers)2023: 1,199 filings (1,339 workers)2024: 1,268 filings (1,325 workers)2025: 1,520 filings (1,606 workers)2026: 323 filings (343 workers)200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021202220232024202520262007: 564 workers2008: 2,962 workers2009: 1,091 workers2010: 536 workers2011: 2,317 workers2012: 2,231 workers2013: 3,031 workers2014: 3,470 workers2015: 3,758 workers2016: 3,703 workers2017: 2,691 workers2018: 2,629 workers2019: 2,258 workers2020: 1,634 workers2021: 1,614 workers2022: 1,904 workers2023: 1,339 workers2024: 1,325 workers2025: 1,606 workers2026: 343 workersfilings
filingsworkers (scaled)

Outcome breakdown (all years)

  • Certified24,968 · 94.6%
  • Denied615 · 2.3%
  • Withdrawn819 · 3.1%

Certified, denied, and withdrawn are application decisions. They do not count visas issued or workers hired.

Context

Enforcement, community health, and money linked to this state's record.

WARN notices (201)

Federal WARN requires 60 days' advance notice; statutory exceptions can shorten or excuse notice. This site publishes notices as filed and does not judge compliance.

Employer · Site
T-Mobile USA, Inc.

Oklahoma City · Notice date: 2026-08-17

--
US Gypsum Co

Southard · Notice date: 2026-07-16

--
PepsiCo

Purchase · Notice date: 2026-07-14

--
Conduent Patient Access Solutions

FLORHAM PARK · Notice date: 2026-06-26

--
Arvest Bank

Lowell · Notice date: 2026-05-04

--
CAE USA Inc

Altus AFB · Notice date: 2026-03-25

--
Vital Energy Inc.

TULSA · Notice date: 2026-03-13

--
Hopkins Mfg- Miami

Miami · Notice date: 2026-02-23

--

A negative % sits below the BLS market median; a positive % sits above.

Immigration law firms (878)

Stump and Associates, PC
-27%$20.7M732
Matthew D. Stump, P.C.
-36%$19.0M453
Fragomen, Del Rey, Bernsen & Loewy, LLP
-22%$8.4M457
Stump and ASSOCIATES, PC
-21%$4.8M180
Hall Estill
$3.7M303
William Velie, Attorney at Law PLLC
-39%$2.9M98
Ramirez & Associates, P.C.
-41%$2.6M87
Law Office of Nina Mawby, PLLC
-20%$1.8M82

Federal contracts (21,974)

Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation

Department of Defense · 2025-12-19

$264.9M

Boeing COMPANY, the

Department of Defense · 2026-04-21

$128.0M

Glenn OIL Company LLC

Department of Defense · 2025-10-03

$91.0M

Omni AIR INTERNATIONAL, LLC

Department of Defense · 2025-10-01

$74.0M

Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation

Department of Defense · 2025-12-23

$64.1M

Magellan Terminals HOLDINGS, L.P.

Department of Defense · 2025-12-23

$54.5M

Boeing COMPANY, the

Department of Defense · 2026-01-29

$50.3M

Boeing COMPANY, the

Department of Defense · 2026-04-23

$48.9M

Medical workforce: licensed vs H-1B

NCSBN licenses BLS OES DOL filingsRecordThe two counts measure different things: NCSBN counts active state licenses (one nurse can hold several), BLS counts employed RNs. The difference between them is a gap between source counts, not a count of nurses not working. Timing overlap with H-1B filings does not establish replacement.
Full medical breakdown for Oklahoma

Community well-being

Food insecurity, SNAP receipt, mental distress, smoking, and overdose mortality in this area. CDC models these from survey data: treat them as local estimates, not headcounts. Bars compare each estimate against population-weighted averages of all reporting areas for the same data year.

Food insecurity

2023

18.5%: 3.3 points above U.S.

Households on SNAP

2023

15.2%: 3.3 points above U.S.

Frequent mental distress

2023

18.0%: 2.0 points above U.S.

Adult smoking

2023

16.3%: 4.2 points above U.S.

Drug overdose deaths

2021

36.0: 3.8 above U.S.

Source: CDC PLACES 2025 release (BRFSS survey year 2023) and NCHS drug poisoning mortality. PLACES values are model-based small-area estimates, not survey counts. Benchmarks are population-weighted averages across all reporting areas.

Evidence & sources

Scope, methods, and source coverage for this state record.

Public source records and site analysis. We do not attest to accuracy. Read the full disclaimer.

Dataset guides and site methods

  1. [1] Dataset documentation · DOL OFLC. LCA public disclosure record layout (FY2026 Q3). Pages 1–4: application, DOL outcome and dates, requested positions, employer, representatives, worksites and pay unitsThis layout covers determinations issued October 1, 2025 through June 30, 2026. It documents employer-provided application fields and DOL decisions, not USCIS decisions, payroll verification, legal bills or worker-linked moves. Older layouts can differ.Checked 2026-10-17.
  2. [2] Dataset documentation · BLS. OEWS technical notes (May 2025). Scope of the survey; occupational coding; concepts and estimation methodologyDocuments occupation and geographic wage estimates, not an individual worker’s pay. Use the estimate year and geography stated by the site; older releases can differ.Checked 2026-10-17.
  3. [3] XH1B method or registry · XH1B. WARN Notices (mass layoffs): source registry; Calculation and Matching Methods; Reading Public Records and Derived Indicators. Source registry entry: warn; Filing units, annualization, weighting, wage comparisons, and inference limits; Reading records: units, source coverage, wage gaps, entity links, and inference limitsXH1B dataset description: One row per source_notice_id. The definition of a mass layoff and the layoff threshold vary by state. The threshold is typically 50 or more employees.; These are the site's review methods, not validated predictions of wrongdoing. Inspect underlying records and alternative explanations.
  4. [4] Dataset documentation · USAspending / U.S. Treasury. Federal Spending Guide: contract transactions. Pages 3, 5, 9 and 17: transactions, amount fields and recipient identifiersContract downloads contain prime award transactions. XH1B’s use of recipient identifiers for employer links is its own processing step.Checked 2026-10-18.
  5. [5] XH1B method or registry · XH1B. Displacement Model and Assumptions. Eligibility, requested-position weighting, scopes, WARN matching, and counting limitsModel outputs are estimates. A matched layoff notice does not prove that an H-1B worker replaced a laid-off worker.
  6. [6] XH1B method or registry · XH1B. Downstream Research and Methods. Study populations, parameter bounds, baselines, and expected outcomes; linked model card
  7. [7] Dataset documentation · National Council of State Boards of Nursing. Active RN Licenses. RN licensure statistics by jurisdiction; linked table header; licensure data compiled through NursysCounts active licenses, not jobs. Check the source year. License and employment figures have different units and do not identify nurses who are not working.Checked 2026-10-18.
  8. [8] Dataset documentation · DOL OFLC. PERM public disclosure record layout (FY2026 Q3). Pages 1–7: ETA-9089 application, DOL outcome and dates, employer, wages and recruitment fieldsThis layout covers determinations issued October 1, 2025 through June 30, 2026, on the form introduced June 1, 2023. A DOL certification is not I-140 approval or permanent residence. Older layouts can differ.Checked 2026-10-17.
  9. [9] Dataset documentation · DOL OFLC. Prevailing Wage disclosure record layout, FY2026 Q3. Page 1: CASE_NUMBER, CASE_STATUS, VISA_CLASS; pages 5–6: PWD_WAGE_RATE, PWD_UNIT_OF_PAY, wage source and validityApplication-level prevailing-wage requests and determinations. Wage units and case status must be read; a determination is not evidence of pay received.Checked 2026-10-18.
  10. [10] Dataset documentation · DOL OFLC. H-2A disclosure record layout, FY2026 Q3. Page 1: application case number and decision; page 5: separate job-order number, requested and certified H-2A workersEmployer application and labor-certification records, not a worker roster or arrival record. A case number differs from a job-order number.Checked 2026-10-18.
  11. [11] Dataset documentation · DOL OFLC. H-2B disclosure record layout, FY2026 Q3. Pages 1–2: case number, requested and certified workers, cap estimates and temporary-need categoriesCap-subject and cap-exempt counts are estimated requested workers. Temporary need includes seasonal, peakload, one-time and intermittent work.Checked 2026-10-18.
  12. [12] Dataset documentation · DOL OFLC. CW-1 disclosure record layout, FY2026 Q3. Page 1: application case number, status and cap-exempt flag; job information: requested and certified workersEmployer applications and labor-certification determinations. A certification is separate from a visa-petition decision or an admission.Checked 2026-10-18.
Questions about the data & methods

How many H-1B filings are in Oklahoma?

24,968 H-1B labor condition applications requesting 39,249 workers have been filed in Oklahoma, per Department of Labor disclosure records.

How many employers have H-1B filings in Oklahoma?

3,945 distinct employers have filed H-1B labor condition applications in Oklahoma. The employer list on this page is ranked by filings and wage impact.

What worker-equivalent exposure does the displacement model estimate for Oklahoma?

The model estimates 49,755 worker-equivalents of displacement exposure in Oklahoma: one per requested worker on a certified H-1B filing, raised where the offered wage sits below the occupation's BLS median, plus government-reported WARN layoffs matched to filings. This is a modeled exposure estimate, not a count of documented job losses; the formula is on the About page.

What is the median H-1B wage in Oklahoma?

$67,870 per year is the median wage offered on H-1B labor condition applications filed for work in Oklahoma. The wage-distribution chart on this page shows the spread around that median.

Who files the most H-1B filings in Oklahoma?

University of Oklahoma leads with 1,295 filings, about 5% of all Oklahoma filings. Its dossier page carries the full filing, wage, and layoff history.

What share of Oklahoma H-1B filings does DOL deny?

DOL disclosure records show 24,968 certified, 615 denied, 819 withdrawn of 26,402 labor condition applications with reported outcomes in Oklahoma. The denial share is 2% across the reported outcomes.

How many WARN layoff notices has Oklahoma recorded?

201 Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) notices. Where a layoff employer then filed H-1B labor condition applications in the same window, the pair is recorded as a displacement event with an evidence score.

When did H-1B use peak in Oklahoma?

Filings peaked in 2015 at 1,960 labor condition applications. The filings-by-year chart on this page shows the full trend since records began.

Which immigration law firms file the most H-1B filings in Oklahoma?

878 distinct law firms and agents have filed H-1B applications for employers in Oklahoma. The law-firm table on this page ranks them by filings and by the wage gap their filings carry.

Do Oklahoma H-1B employers hold federal contracts?

21,974 federal contract actions in Oklahoma name employers that also file H-1B labor condition applications. The contracts table links each award to the employer dossier. A shared employer name does not show how award funds were spent.

Where does the Oklahoma H-1B data come from?

Every figure on this page traces to a public government record: DOL OFLC disclosure files (LCA filings, wages, outcomes), BLS OES wage data (occupation medians), state WARN notices, and federal contract awards. The archive is read-only evidence; nothing is crowdsourced or anonymous.