The DS-7002 Training Plan
How Your Host Company Fills It Out Right
The DS-7002 is the most important document in the entire J-1 process. It is filled out by your host organization, not by you as the intern or trainee. It must describe learning, not labour. If it reads like work, the sponsor, or later the consular officer, rejects it, no matter how good the role itself is. That is exactly what we are here for: as the sponsor’s representative, we tell the person handling it at the host what needs to go in, and we check the plan for compliance before it goes to the sponsor.
Why does the DS-7002 matter most?
The DS-7002 is the Training and Internship Placement Plan that defines your entire J-1. Everything else supports one claim: that you are coming to be trained, not to fill a regular role. A weak plan is the most common reason an otherwise strong case stalls, and pointing out what is missing is what we do most often.
Only your host organization may complete the DS-7002, meaning the person handling it at the US host (usually HR or your supervisor). As an intern or trainee you cannot write it yourself. As the sponsor’s representative, we tell the host what belongs in it if they are not sure, and we check every draft before it goes to the sponsor. The plan has to follow the State Department rules (22 CFR 62.22) closely, so there is little room for interpretation.
Why do training plans get rejected?
The typical failed plan reads like a task list. It lists what you will do for the company. A plan that passes reads like a curriculum: it describes what you will learn and how. Same role, different framing, very different outcome.
What makes a plan read as training?
Every line should answer two questions:
- What is being learned?
- Under whose guidance, and how?
If a sentence describes output the company receives rather than a skill you gain, rewrite it until it describes the skill.
Training words vs work words
Word choice does real work on this form. The two columns below send opposite signals to a reviewer:
| Sounds like training | Sounds like work |
|---|---|
| learn, observe, analyze, shadow | work, assist with, cover shifts |
| develop an understanding of | responsible for delivering |
| under the supervision of | manage, handle, data entry |
| gain exposure to, study how | complete tasks, meet targets |
A classic red flag, fixed
A line like “will manage the social media accounts” signals that you are replacing an employee, which is exactly what the program is not for. The honest reframe might be: “learns US social media strategy by analyzing live campaigns under the guidance of the marketing manager.”
If the role is genuinely just work, no phrasing fixes it. The fix is to change the role so real training exists, not to change the words on the form.
How the phases should progress
A strong plan moves through phases, and each phase must be visibly different from the last:
Orientation and observation
You learn the environment, tools, and standards, largely by watching and being briefed.
Guided application
You apply what you have learned with close supervision and structured feedback.
Advanced and more independent
You take on harder work with lighter oversight and demonstrate the skills you built.
Copying the same text across phases is itself a red flag, and so is a plan that never moves past “observe”. Each phase should read like a step up.
How we want it built
We run the plan through our sponsor system, require at least 32 hours per week, and set the number of phases by your program’s duration and category. The plan is tied explicitly to your field: the degree, the relevant coursework, and any prior roles the training builds on. Your only task as the participant is to give your host organization this information so the person handling it can word the plan precisely.
The checklist before it goes to the sponsor
- Does every line name a skill being learned, not just a task being done?
- Is there a named supervisor and a clear method of instruction?
- Are the phases genuinely different from one another?
- Is the link to your field of study explicit?
- Would you describe this honestly as training if asked at the interview?
Related: what your host company must meet and prohibited fields and industries.
Get the Training Plan Reviewed
Send us your situation and your host organization’s draft, and we will tell you and the person handling it whether the DS-7002 reads as training and what still needs to be adjusted, before it goes to the sponsor.
Is Your DS-7002 Strong Enough?
Tell us about the role and we will flag anything that reads as work rather than training.
Questions & Answers
At VisaNerd we sponsor strictly within the US Department of State exchange visitor regulations (22 CFR 62.22) and current BridgeUSA policy. What you read here is how we actually sponsor and what we require, not a general overview of other sponsors. It is practical guidance from our team, not legal advice; your eligibility is confirmed through us as your sponsor contact, and the final visa decision is made by the US consular officer.