Attrition Logic
Let’s assume we have 100 people in line at a store and they are assigned a number as they walk in the door.
This store can help 10 people per hour. No more, no less.
8 to 9 1-10
9 to 10 11-20
10 to 11 21-30
11 to 12 31-40
12 to 1 41-50
1 to 2 51-60
2 to 3 61-70
3 to 4 71-80
4 to 5 81-90
5 to 6 91-100
However, numbers 51 through 100 have an occasional random RED number for 25% of the numbers. That makes 15 numbers. And all of these numbers will be served from 11:30 to 3:00, which will push some other numbers back.
I used a random number generator to get the following numbers that are between 51 and 100 inclusive: 51, 53, 54, 57, 59, 69, 70, 72, 74, 77, 79, 91, 93, 94, and 97.
If they do this evenly then that would be five of these numbers every hour which if we do this as three in the first half and two in the second half would turn our above chart into:
8 to 9 : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
9 to 10 : 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
10 to 11 : 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
11 to 12 : 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 plus 51 53 54
12 to 1 : 38 39 40 41 42 plus 57 59 69 70 72
1 to 2 : 43 44 45 46 47 plus 74 77 79 91 93
2 to 3 : 48 49 50 52 55 56 58 60 plus 94 97
3 to 4 : 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 71 73
4 to 5 : 75 76 78 80 81 82 83 84 85 86
5 to 6 : 87 88 89 90 92 95 96 98 99 100
Let me simplify this. If we don’t take into effect the special red numbers then we’d think they did:
8 to 9 1-10 (10)
9 to 10 11-20 (10)
10 to 11 21-30 (10)
11 to 12 31-37 (7)
12 to 1 38-42 (5)
1 to 2 43-47 (5)
2 to 3 48-60 (13)
3 to 4 61-73 (13)
4 to 5 74-86 (13)
5 to 6 87-100 (14)
In order for this to have any relevancy to the wait at all then two things have to be true. 1) The CCAA has a certain amount of adoptions per year they are allowed to do and 2) this number is a combination of SN and NSN adoptions.
If number one is true then I expect that number two is as well. If Beijing doesn’t want the numbers that various countries publish to show China as being head and shoulders above the other countries then I can’t see them limiting one and not the other. The official high enough up to be making those decision probably doesn’t even think in terms of the two programs, just the one IA number. Plus, some agencies who verify the upper limit exists say it includes all adoptions, not just the NSN program.
The example given is not supposed to exactly mirror what would have happened at the CCAA. The example has a beginning and an end and is misleading if you don’t look at it with that in mind. It is only supposed to show what it would look like if some people later in line went earlier in a system with a finite number of people served in a time period. What happens is that for a time period it appears less people are being serviced and then for a time it appears more people are being serviced.
With the CCAA we know that less people were already being given referrals per month to start with, and this created a situation where people went the SN route and then we have the issue of it possibly appearing that even less people were being serviced than were already less being serviced.
I’ve tried to wrap my brain around where we might be in this cycle if this is happening. Many families started switching to SN in late 2005 and early 2006. If the first rush of these families got their TA in March of ‘06 then that could account for the very small numbers those months. The effect would have lasted a few months and then would have evened out a bit as they reached months that people had been in line who had already adopted a SN child. So that kind of makes sense. And now we’re probably just in a holding pattern with it, since people who were LID in November have gone away at about 25% but so many other people are adopting SN that it more than takes up that 25%.
Sometime last year several agencies created a rule that you could not switch to SN after you were logged in for NSN. Other agencies created a rule that you only had a set number of months after LID that you could switch. And more recently the CCAA created the rule that you could not switch agencies to get a child on another list. I’m assuming that at some point last year less people started switching to SN. This tells me that at some point in time we might see a perceived speed up as we come out of this effect. Or, maybe not. As now I think a lot of people just go straight to SN and never get into the NSN line.
In other words, there is probably an affect at play that could show us a bit of a perceived speed up of NSN families but I cannot figure out when we might see this perceived speed up.
May 14th, 2007 at 11:40 am
Um…Wow. After reading this post 3 times, I have concluded that RQ has quite a few more brain cells firing than I do. So…in conclusion…we are attributing too much meaning to past fluctuations, as they are caused by the increased emphasis on SN? (need more coffee…)
May 14th, 2007 at 11:48 am
Oh my God, I think I need to close my eyes for a couple of minutes.
You are amazing RQ! Is statistics your field or just a hobby?
Waiting for Siobahn
3-28-06
May 14th, 2007 at 11:52 am
I agree! After reading this a few times I kept saying out loud, huh? Huh? My guess is the RQ is into statistics. As for a living, however customers without computer access…hum still trying to figure you out. I love the cloak of mystic.
May 14th, 2007 at 11:52 am
Hi RQ,
I had to read slowly as well…. But are you suggesting that the 25% attrition is mostly NSN to SN? hence a perceived speed up vs. a true one if attrition were to other programs?
Thanks for all your info–especially this latest possible 20 day batch.
May 14th, 2007 at 11:53 am
RQ I don’t post much but I just had to say how glad I am that you are back! I love this site and checking it in the morning and seeing the new post it just makes my day. For some reason it makes me feel like we are moving forward, maybe it just makes the time go faster. I know everyone says it, but I have to add my “THANK YOU!” You are very appreciated!
Michele (momin2007 was too optimistic) :-)
May 14th, 2007 at 12:08 pm
All I have to say is that you are a riot at the least!! To take this time and try to figure it all out, for US, I thank you!!!
Do you know more than your saying?????:)
May 14th, 2007 at 12:14 pm
No, I don’t know more than I’m saying. Sorry.
Let me try to say this another way…. if 25% of the people who should be getting a referral this month traveled and returned home with a SN child a year ago then the more intense slowdown of that period was really just a perceived further slowing. And at some point we might see a perceived slight speeding up.
And I have absolutely no idea when we might see it.
May 14th, 2007 at 12:16 pm
Thanks for keeping us in the loop- I like hearing some positive stuff once in awhile!!
May 14th, 2007 at 12:22 pm
Whoa!!!
At first I got it, then I didn’t, but by the end I think I got it again, but could NEVER explain it.
It is a very interesting look at the attrition rate. I had never considered the number of people changing from NSN to SN into the referral-numbers end of the process. I guess that is because until last week I thought the SN and NSN referral-numbers were exclusive.
RQ, people with left-side-dominate brains, like you and my mom, amaze me! I am so far right-side-dominate that I have trouble with basic arithmetic.
Thanks for all this time consuming number crunching!
LID May 10, 2006
May 14th, 2007 at 12:27 pm
Okay! My brain hurts! But it seems that all the way around it would explain a few things. Hopefully, this ‘percieved’ speed up is on it’s way.
On another note, I talked to my agency, in December and just recently about switching to SN. In Dec. they were just in the process of working with another agency. They were able to get one family switched over before the CCAA changed the rules.
May 14th, 2007 at 12:33 pm
RQ, this falls in line with what Dh and I have been talking about and how it’s entirely possible to get through Nov faster than we thought because some have switched to SN. That we would see it as a speed up, but in reality it’s going at the same pace because there are fewer people with LID in Nov waiting.
I just never really put together what we were discussing with the cap on IA allowed. It really does make sense though.
May 14th, 2007 at 1:31 pm
Very interesting RQ…thanks for the analysis! I wish this all wasn’t such a mystery, but I am grateful for your help to illuminate the situation.
May 14th, 2007 at 1:43 pm
That’s more than my little brain can handle. I guess it’s settled….I’m NOT smarter than a 5th grader! =)
May 14th, 2007 at 1:51 pm
I second and third etc. the observation that our RQ is amazing. And am so grateful that the site did not immediately change focus to being home with baby as I thought it might. Don’t get me wrong–I love reading about all of that but as so many of us continue to wait (a long time still), this is the only place to get a handle on what is going on and glean information with which to make informed decisions.
Thank you, RQ. You ROCK!
May 14th, 2007 at 2:12 pm
Hi!
Just want to say thanks RQ for the way you are handling the statistic parts of the Rumor Queendom: You don’t just give us your conclusions, you explain how you came to them too. That makes it possible for me to make my own decisions about what to believe and what to not believe. Thank you thank you thank you. It is a bit frustrating to think about a coming speed up as only perceived. But it is as comforting to know some of the slow down may have been only perceived too.
May 14th, 2007 at 2:13 pm
LOL Mamman - what is the saying? Perception is everything?
May 14th, 2007 at 2:19 pm
That made my brain hurt. Thanks…
May 14th, 2007 at 2:23 pm
RQ - you must have taken a course in Queueing Theory, eh? Are you an engineer by any chance?
May 14th, 2007 at 3:00 pm
Wow, very impressive stat analysis and more so your excellent attempt to explain it in terms we right brain kids can comprehend! Yes, another Rt brain is in the house.
I think we may one day see you, RQ, on the network media circuit (drive by media or on Fox News or both). Perhaps we already have! Perhaps you are Dr. House, M.D.
I am sure you have taken artistic license with your backstory, I would have, to avoid any potential
discovery of my true identity.
I’ve got it, you are Ms. Jolie-Pitt. It’s a little known fact that she has an advanced degree in statistics. And Brad did actually attend an institute of higher learning for a while at least!.
Jesting aside, thank you so much for your dedication to your website and its followers. I think you should get a major humanitarian award and lets throw in the Nobel prize too !
oh and belated Happy Mother’s Day!
May 14th, 2007 at 3:51 pm
Completely agree with your analysis of the impact of the increase in people switching from NSN to SN.
But, what about the other “attrition” rate, when people drop out of the program entirely due to country switch, pregnancy, etc. I think the increasing drop out rate would have the opposite impact. It would make it appear that the CCAA is processing more files than it actually is.
Thoughts? I won’t be insulted if someone lets me know I’m way off!!
May 14th, 2007 at 3:55 pm
Canuckdude - for the people receiving referrals right now the attrition rate of people who drop completely out of the program appears to be 5% or less. Not enough at this point to make much of a difference.
A year from now that will probably change.
May 14th, 2007 at 3:56 pm
I just have a few questions that are probably not related to anything on this page, but was unsure where else to put them. If anyone can help with this, it would be great. I was cruising through the CCAA Website, hoping to see a change in the review room dates….there were none…but I spotted an article in their updates section, and I can’t get it to come up in English. Has anyone else had better success?
Ironically, my Spam word is CCAA…ha!
Thanks to anyone who can help…
Cindy
LID 5/30/06
May 14th, 2007 at 3:58 pm
Thanks RQ. I thought the drop out rate would already be higher. Good to know.
May 14th, 2007 at 4:11 pm
Cindy, you may have to put the web address for it into somehting like Yahoo’s babel fish to get it translated.
So, RQ, are you saying that part of the “slowdown” in NSN referrals was due to people getting out of that line and moving into SN, which put them ahead of everyone else still waiting? And that now that the switch to SN is less easy (or even prohibited) we may see a speed up as the line continues to move forward in a now more linear, first-come, first-served fashion?
Just had to spout it back to you to see if I get the point.
Man, am I glad to have the blog back. I missed it a lot.
Thx
wBw
May 14th, 2007 at 4:24 pm
MacyGirlInChina - if you click on the story and when it opens, then right click on the mouse and a window will appear. There should be a line that says “translate to English”, when you click on that it should switch to English. I have done this but it doesn’t say anything about review or referrals. Hope this helps.
May 14th, 2007 at 4:27 pm
I’m still digesting this, but I’m trying to figure out how 25% of 50 numbers yields 15 red numbers. Can someone explain?
May 14th, 2007 at 4:59 pm
Its like you are all diving to Disneyland and 25% of the people get to use a special lane. So when you get there, everyone who left before you and some people who left after you, end up in front of you. Now they have all been let into the park and the line picks up, but really it’s only because it was so clogged when you first arrived at the gate. It will seem faster, but only because it was slowed down by those who were in the special lane merging with those in the regular lanes. It’s traffic basically. Think of fast pass. Once you get past where the let the fast pass holders in, it goes faster because no one else can go in front of you who showed up later. You all become the same line at some point.
May 14th, 2007 at 5:06 pm
grcm - yes, except that people will always continue to move in front of you since SN adoptions continue to happen in very large numbers. The question is, at what point (if any) will we see a perceived speed up? I think there very well may be a point we see it, but I also think that the SN program may continue to increase in numbers and keep eating away at that upper limit so we don’t see one. I can successfully argue it both ways.
waitbabywait - kind of, except I’m not saying we WILL see a perceived speed up, just that we might.
May 14th, 2007 at 5:09 pm
waitbabywait, even with the SN rules changed so that fewer NSNs will become SNs and so ‘jump’ the queue) — even with that, more people are going SN from the start, and those people will still queue jump — so there is still plenty of chance for Nov 05 families to have people with later LIDs receive referrals sooner.
The number of unknown or unpredictable variables now in play
is staggering. This made a beautiful picture, though, (and a very familiar-looking one):
8 to 9 1-10 (10)
9 to 10 11-20 (10)
10 to 11 21-30 (10)
11 to 12 31-37 (7)
12 to 1 38-42 (5)
1 to 2 43-47 (5)
2 to 3 48-60 (13)
3 to 4 61-73 (13)
4 to 5 74-86 (13)
5 to 6 87-100 (14)
May 14th, 2007 at 6:26 pm
I just love hearing everyone talking about a speed up, actual or perceived. Any speed up is a good speed up I say!
Think I’m gonna say it again….speed up, speed up, speed up!!!! :-)
May 14th, 2007 at 7:19 pm
There may be more families starting the adoption route with the SN’s program, however, there are less families now that qualify for the SN’s program. Our agency, China only, has outlined on their website the guidelines for SN’s.
Alot of families, maybe about 40% do not meet the financial qualifications, or are older than the new requirements and have more than 4 children in the home.
Before the new rules became active, we qualified to adopt our ds without any problems. The main reason was because he was a boy, older than 3 and there were not many families petitioning for him. About 6 months after we made the commitment to adopt him our agency was bombarded with applications for SN’s adoptions. People switching. The children in high demand were girls, under 2, pretty and with minor special needs. Our agency changed it’s SN’s procedure completely to when we started with them. Many families now petition for certain children, the agency decides which family they think would be best for the children. They have second, third etc petitioning round for the remainder of the Waiting Children. More files are going back because those that are willing to adopt children with more severe disabilities do not qualify anymore. I know other agencies handle the petitioning process differently. I know our agency use to place most of their WC, but now, it doesn’t seem to be the case.
I am not sure what will happen with CCAA after receiving
larger amounts of files back than before. Our agency said that they will not budge on their requirments for adoptive families SN’s or NSN’s. Someone told me that their agency would not allow them to switch to SN’s because they do not qualify financially for a SN’s child, but are OK for NSN’s.
I am wondering if other agencies are not allowing switching.
May 14th, 2007 at 7:44 pm
I am so glad that others felt like they were in some advanced placement stats class. Its been a really long day, I read it twice and still looked at the screen with the same look that a dog gets when they’re confused about something!!!
I think I understand your point that the attrition to SN has had a different outcome to our wait than we/I originally would have expected.
I share the thought of the other poster: COME ON PERCEIVED SPEED UP!!! If nothing else, the “perceived” speed up would be a welcome change from the “perceived” and/or real slowdown we’ve been experiencing since 1/06.
Susan
May 14th, 2007 at 9:44 pm
RQ,
Worst case scenario, I sense that someone at the very end of the very long NSN line could never manage to get ahead of the SN people cutting in - specifically is the overall referrals per year continutes to decrease.
My husband and I are at the very end and paralyzed with indecision.
May 14th, 2007 at 10:28 pm
HI RQ:
I am a new member - just found you and I am simply in awe. The service you are providing is priceless!
However, believe it or not, my dh and I don’t even have our dossier in! CIS lost our docs for 3 months (”they are somewhere in the building, but it is a big building…”) and we moved across country and had to redo everything…we started this in Sept 2005! But we are committed to China for a number of reasons. DH has been there many times on biz and that is our decision. However, we have two amazing boys and delight in them while we go thru this process.
Thanks for providing us with a reality check about the timelines…and I do pray for speed up, speed up, for all of you waiting…especially those waiting to be parents for the first time. Believe me…the wait is worth it!
Mezzo in CO
May 14th, 2007 at 10:51 pm
I hated stats in college…wish RQ has taught it! This is fascinating. Thanks.
How could someone figure what percentage the program will grow or decline by this year? It would be so interesting to have some real numbers for not only those who are switching to SN, but also for those who don’t qualify and those who aren’t willing to deal with the extended wait times. Will these just offset what might have been a normal percentage increase of dossiers submitted (because the program has been growing each year, I think) or will it cause a dramatic decrease in total dossiers submitted? Anyone know the percentages by which the number of dossiers submitted has increase year after year (for the past several years)?
I haven’t asked recently, but a few months ago, our agency said that the number of dossiers submitted were not decreasing (but they also didn’t say they were up by 20% over last year). They were actually a bit surprised. I wonder what is happening now that we’ve hit May 1st???Wonder how this all pans out with the possibility that there are just more people adopting internationally now than in the past. Maybe we won’t see as big a drop in dossiers overall as it seems.
Does this make any sense?
May 14th, 2007 at 11:06 pm
sks– that idea sounds terrible and possible at the same time. Cheers to being at the end of the line (not)!
May 14th, 2007 at 11:41 pm
Hmmm…when will the percieved speed up happen?? NOW would be nice…Yes, NOW is my vote!
May 15th, 2007 at 2:48 am
sks~you make a good point i think.
how many should get to have “cuts in line?” in front of each part. nsn group? what’s fair? should it be like expedited, or just anytime a sn child is petitioned for? what isn’t fair? does CCAA worry about that?
i wonder too, when they talk about paper-ready babies, if they are including sn in that.
just musings laaaate at night…
wBw
May 15th, 2007 at 7:27 am
wbw - the CCAA finds families for babies, not babies for families.
This means that they get SN children’s paperwork handled ASAP so these children can join their families as soon as possible and in some cases can get surgeries and other medical help that much faster.
The NSN paperwork that comes in gets matched with whoever is next in line.
May 15th, 2007 at 8:06 am
This is fascinating RQ - thank you for allowing all of us use our brains! As this scenario plays out, won’t the NSN children get older and/or potentially “age” out of IA? Is there an age at which children are no longer eligible to be placed as part of IA unless specifically requested? It seems I’ve read that there is but can’t recall.
May 15th, 2007 at 8:41 am
RQ!!! Thanks for making my work my brain first thing in the morning!!!
His,
Mrs. U
LID 9-12-05
referral 1-4-07
“Gotcha Day” 2-25-07 for Elizabeth
http://www.makingahouseahome.blogspot.com
May 15th, 2007 at 12:59 pm
Oh my…you lost me way back here:
“However, numbers 51 through 100 have an occasional random RED number for 25% of the numbers.”
Was I the only right brain who needed the numbers actually colored red? LOL!
I did better with the Disney line comparison. Now I’m thinking there should be a FastPass kiosk at CCAA. Just insert your dossier and get a stamp that lets you cut in line!
May 15th, 2007 at 1:27 pm
I know the families for babies thing…But still, parents have feelings too. I can’t deny mine. For many of us it’s our personal selfish need that leads us to adoption. I must confess to adopting soley because I want a child. I feel like Holly Hunter in Raising Arizona, if, that is, I drop my “zen-wait-posture” and really look at myself inside. In the future I see myself adopting for more altruistic reasons, but first I must attain motherhood somehow.
It does seem to me that there ought to be two seperate tracks, to benefit both groups, otherwise the NSN people will be waiting longer and longer and the NSN children will be waiting longer and longer too.
Although it does seems as if NSN referrals are getting younger,
I worry about children age-ing out. (Let alone me age-ing out! lol )
wBw