CCAA Staff Reduction, and news on the SN program
We have news that the CCAA has let their contract employees go. Apparently the head of the Waiting Child program is amongst those who have been let go, as well as at least one matcher, and several people from the review room. I’m also led to understand that at least one of the higher up people is gone, though it is possible that was some sort of retirement package.
I don’t know what this means, and neither do any of my contacts. The two who are willing to speculate seem to be focusing on cash flow, but I think they are just guessing at this point.
In other news, we’ve known that the SN Snail Mail Lists are supposed to be a thing of the past. The new computer driven system is supposed to work differently. Apparently the CCAA right now is restricting the SN program to about 30 select agencies, and the other agencies appear to just be out in the cold at this point. I’ve been assuming that the CCAA would let the other agencies into the program once they get the bugs worked out with the initial agencies invited to the program, but some of the agencies not included do not seem to be under that impression.
I’m not really happy with either of these news items. Not happy that they exist, and not happy that I have to report on them. I realize that everyone is going to jump to the conclusion that letting people go means a much smaller program. But, we’ve kind of known that already, right? Less dossiers are being received, and less referrals have been going out the door for a long time now.
I’ve sat here for five minutes trying to find a way to put a positive spin on this one. I can’t.
February 5th, 2008 at 8:47 am
RQ,
Thanks for all you info., as usual. NOTHING surprises me anymore!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
February 5th, 2008 at 8:48 am
RQ,
I PM’d you about why my posts are not showing, but got no response. Is there a reason I’m missing!!!!!??????
February 5th, 2008 at 8:52 am
RQ, you are right…how do you put a positive spin on this. I do have a thought…..It looks as though we are starting to see some evidence of cash flow problems with smaller China only agencies because of the long wait. It is possible that it is starting to have an affect in China too? Maybe this is what they need to realize to start making more children paper ready.
Very confused this morning…just when things were looking up! Thanks for your reports…good news or bad news, we will take it.
LID 5-12-06
February 5th, 2008 at 9:06 am
I would agree this doesn’t appear to be a positive development. On the other hand, I’ve heard a lot of reasons for the slow-down, with the general consensus being not enough paper-ready children and too many parent dossiers. I don’t know that not having enough CCAA workers will really factor into the equation, although it is sad to hear about people losing their jobs. Also, clearly not a positive development for the SN program. I do hope they allow more participation in the future.
February 5th, 2008 at 9:08 am
Our agency rep just returned from China with the same sort of news. Our agency has been told that they are included in the new online system. SN children will be posted there and the agencies can read about them and apply to have the dossier if they think they have a family for the specific child.
Our agency was told that they should not expect many children with minor SN in the future (what falls into the category of minor SN was not specified). Most of the children on the CCAA SN website will have more severe SN (again, it was not specified what that is).
February 5th, 2008 at 9:10 am
Well, that certainly makes one re-think the whole ‘emphasis on SN program’ angle, doesn’t it?
As a parent to a child waiting for me in China, this is not the news I wanted to hear. The thought that these changes may delay our journey to our daughter stinks.
I am confused a bit as to the SN program having a “matching” person, as the matching goes on at the agency level.
February 5th, 2008 at 9:16 am
I believe CCAA is working on three different SN processes that will be a means of placing waiting children. One was the old ‘paper referral’ route, which will now be online and yes, many agencies are left out in the cold on that one for now. The other is the ‘shared listings’ which is already in place at several agencies, placing older and/or more significant special needs children. The third program involves agencies working with specific orphanages to place all their waiting children through that one agency. The agency would give the orphanage financial support and the children would, in theory, fare better, as would the children left at the orphanage. The agency would have more contact with the orphanage, be able to provide more updates, etc, making this program very desirable to adoptive parents. This is currently implemented at only a few agencies, but I hope this program gets off the ground and quickly. It seems that it would benefit both the children and the mid-size to small agencies, giving them not only a way to place children, but a way to help those left behind.
February 5th, 2008 at 9:22 am
This is not a shock to me. Not because of the smaller referral production, but because of the Olympics, which, in turn causes less production with CCAA. My thought on this; it’s possible the Olympics are taking priority in China as a productive nation. And China needs all of it’s resourses…including training government workers to do something for the Olympics. DH has said all along that the Olympics has and will interfere with referrals. Not because they are concerned that reporters will ‘expose’ the orphanages, but because China needs all of it’s resources going toward creating a perfect Olympics front right now. A big part of those resources are the workers. So….I’d be interested in finding out WHERE those workers are going to be working next month?!? China is not like the States, in that we close down production lines, to allow those highly trained workers to be on unemployment for 1-2 years. They are resourceful. If they are going to let someone go that has substantial ability, it will be to redirect them to a different area of government work.
February 5th, 2008 at 9:28 am
RQ or anybody else,
If they are limiting SN to 30 agencies, is that just US agencies or is that world wide? Do you know how many agencies there are in the US that have China programs in the US?
Thanks.
February 5th, 2008 at 9:39 am
Does anyone know if this will affect those of us with a sn referral but not quite DTC yet? I am very worried. We are waiting on our 797 approval and where I am living this could takes months!! (which is a another story)
February 5th, 2008 at 9:44 am
“We are waiting on our 797 approval and where I am living this could takes months!!”
Have you talked to your congressman/woman they can speed up things for you if you going the special need route
February 5th, 2008 at 9:51 am
I don’t necessarily think this a doom and gloom thing. We all know the amount of dossiers being sent to China has now dropped dramatically, why would they need the same amount of workers they had before to process half the amount coming in? They have already logged in the flood of dossiers following the rule change and they now have all the time in the world to work on the dossiers they already have through review — you don’t need to keep extra workers for that. As for the head of the Waiting Child program, we know that program appears to be in full swing. Perhaps they are making changes to work out some kinks?
February 5th, 2008 at 10:05 am
guangximom I agree that with so few signing up now they shouldn’t need as many workers for NSN. They have reviewed files way ahead of matching so no rush there. What bothers me most is the SN program stuff. If indeed CCAA wants to expand the SN program and make it primary this just doesn’t seem to be the way to do it.
February 5th, 2008 at 10:08 am
andyadoption ,
If I do go that route I was told by fellow adopters in our state that my file would go to the bottom of the pile. Unless our child is in need of surgery upon coming home or while in China there will be no speeding up the process.
February 5th, 2008 at 10:09 am
I also believe that this news is not all doom and gloom like guangximom. Given the fact that some feel there will be little or no referrals around the Olympics, it would make sense to let contract workers go. With the small referrals per month, extra workers probably are not needed. As to the head of the WC, corporate America does this all of the time. If the department is not running the way the higher ups feel it should, the head of the department that is not meeting it’s goals is let go. I would like to keep hope that China’s adoption program will continue, at least as well as it is at this time.
February 5th, 2008 at 10:11 am
ok i was just passing on this info
February 5th, 2008 at 10:15 am
Not happy.
February 5th, 2008 at 10:19 am
I’m so freaked out about this…I don’t think our agency is in the online program, and we were just waiting for their next list to hopefully find our child. I feel like we’re losing our only option to add to our family. We’re LID 4/11/07…and waiting it out won’t work for us (unless they want to give a child to an insane mama).
UGH. What a lousy day.
February 5th, 2008 at 10:32 am
Maybe the press conference or press release that someone spoke about and is supposed to take place after the CNY will add more precision on this? If it is related…
This doesn’t sound good news to me for the moment…
February 5th, 2008 at 10:33 am
Maybe the people they were letting go, retiring early, etc… is part of some efficiency plan. Cutting down redundencies, or adjusting staff since they are making more use of technology, etc… (More online contacts with agencies, etc….)
Maybe the problem hasn’t been so much lack of paper ready babies, but inefficient workers reviewing and matching? Perhaps those let go were let go for good cause? Maybe higher ups have been frustrated about how long the wait looks and made staff cuts appropriately.
February 5th, 2008 at 10:39 am
I was just going to email the RQ to see if you knew anything about this, and here it is. So, now for my next question – what do you hear about CCAA “unofficially†refusing to place children with families of color? Any truth to the stories that several black/mixed race families have been turned down recently? Thanks.
February 5th, 2008 at 10:50 am
Obaby, I certainly hope there isn’t anything about mixed families being turned down. We are a mixed (black/white) couple and are LID 5/06. We are through review and were asked no questions. Where are you hearing these stories? I know there was a woman last winter who had trouble, but haven’t heard anything since.
Also, does anyone know how we find out which agencies are part of the “30″? I know that my agency has been anxiously awaiting a new list. They didn’t mention anything at all about this in their most recent update!
February 5th, 2008 at 10:52 am
kms,
I guess that could be the positive spin we have been looking for.
February 5th, 2008 at 10:52 am
I don’t know, I read this and didn’t feel too bad about it, it doesn’t hit me in the gut as being a problem. It shows me that some sort of change is afoot but doesn’t strike me as immediately bad, and I’m a Jan 07 LID.
February 5th, 2008 at 10:53 am
I am not surprised by the letting go of workers for the NSN program. To me it does seem like they are phasing out that program, or really trying to make is smaller. I am surprised by the WC/SN reduction, that doesn’t make sense unless the person was let go for other reasons. My agency is on the online system for SN and it does seem as if the children have more severe needs lately. Sounds as if the rumor of them referring children with mild SN or corrected SN’s as NSN may be correct. Interesting stuff…
February 5th, 2008 at 10:55 am
Well…does Not sound like a plan for a speed-up :(
February 5th, 2008 at 10:59 am
I am also wondering like guangximom and nana2livi if this might be away to fix inefficiencies…maybe they are trying to rehaul the program to make things more efficient? If this is the case, then perhaps things will go faster at least in the review room? Also, perhaps the number of files in the review room that need reviewing have gone done dramatically. I believe they are past the huge months in 2006 and I would expect there are fewer files to review, so maybe they just don’t need as many people there…I see that as a positive,not a negative (if it works out to be true).
As for the WC program…well that will hurt some agencies for sure…but I have also heard that they will allow some new agencies into that program too…just maybe not right now.
I hope that perhaps they will bring in some new people to the WC area that will improve the efficiencies of that program.
I know its hard to know anything at this point. At this point, I am holding off in assuming the worst. Thank you for reporting the information RQ.
February 5th, 2008 at 10:59 am
Congrats to all the new families!
In reading the updates from HTS, I was struck by the numbers of children reported to be housed in some orphanages…seemed high to me, based on what we’ve heard. I was unable to visit our daughter’s orphanage, but last summer the yahoo group reported there were ~30-40 children there. This number seemed small, and I do believe this SWI is probably good about getting babies paper-ready, so perhaps this is why. RQ or anyone else, do the numbers mentioned by HTS surprise you, or would that be pretty normal? Regardless of the numbers, it is heartbreaking to think of their suffering due to the weather.
February 5th, 2008 at 11:02 am
Don’t forget that there has been a hash of political fireings and coruption reviews since the New congress started in the fall last year. I’ve also heard of the race thing and it seems taht a us agency was kicked out of the program for trying to work it too hard, lose of face for many involved over there.
February 5th, 2008 at 11:04 am
I’m hoping they let their nonefficient employees go and will be hiring more efficient employees. Maybe they just realized they are STILL processing ’05 families while at the same time logging in new ’08 families and realized something has to change.
February 5th, 2008 at 11:12 am
Possibility exists is China as it does here, that when things heat up. Stuff rolls down hill. When there are problems someone is always the blame. Lets hope we have some positive come out of this!!
February 5th, 2008 at 11:21 am
A few answers:
The WC person that was let go was one that the agencies liked. Someone who put their heart and soul into the job. Not someone to be let go because they were not doing a good job. Unless the CCAA doesn’t want the agencies to like their employees, which I suppose is possible, but sad if it is the case. More likely, the CCAA fired those that they could get away with firing easily, the contract employees, and this person happened to fall into that category.
Sadly, there is truth about the CCAA attempting to deny people based on the color of their skin. Most agencies have (strongly) gone to bat for their clients and have managed to get their clients through the process okay, though with a pretty big fight to make it happen. I am aware that not all people of color are denied, but I’m also aware of more than a couple of cases where it strongly appears this was the case. It has not happened (to my knowledge) in the last 7 or 8 months, hopefully that nonsense is over.
I have made a note of the number of children reported for storm purposes at some of the orphanages, and I’ve noted that the number is much higher than numbers I’ve recently seen. Definitely one of those things that make you go hmmmmmm.
February 5th, 2008 at 11:29 am
Thanks for that RQ . Would love to find out how many couples have pulled their dossiers since last spring and how many dossiers are actualy in the line now.
February 5th, 2008 at 11:35 am
Thanks RQ…I also wondered about the number of older kids in HTS’s reports in the SWI..esp the older kids. I agree…an hmmmmm moment.
Thats too bad about the WC person as well. …I guess its a wait and see issue…
February 5th, 2008 at 11:37 am
Wow–that poll just arrived with no fanfare. Love it though. I haven’t been able to vote in a poll since last June. Everyone go vote!
February 5th, 2008 at 11:52 am
I won’t worry until everyone is canned. Didn’t they add staff a year or so ago? Also, maybe it’s a fallout for the slow down maybe the higher-ups want things to run faster. Maybe too much information was getting out and those where the talkers or maybe they are a group who have been perhaps favoring an agency or two? Crazy ideas I know.
February 5th, 2008 at 11:59 am
As for the reviewers that were fired, I can think of at least one that should have been fired. Just ask kcbock about that. Ugh, that was an ordeal. Besides the beloved WC employee let’s hope that this will streamline the process??? Well, that’s my positive spin. Sorry to hear about the WC employee though. :(
bb…waiting to get the heck out of the Review Room!!!
February 5th, 2008 at 12:04 pm
I was thinking the same thing Maysmom. Maybe it is part of the fallout from agencies receiving special treatment. Who knows?? All I know is I haven’t been very happy about the progress so far and at this point I’m ready to roll the dice and take my chances on change. And if this should turn out to not be a good change, I’m also at the point of letting it happen now rather than later. If the program is going to stop or change dramatically, then for me, the sooner the better. I’d rather know now than wait another year before something bad happens.
February 5th, 2008 at 12:39 pm
It seems counterproductive to get RID of people in an effort to speed things up.
My guess: they don’t need a larger staff to handle smaller referral numbers. Why else would they get rid of “extras”? From a business point of view, why pay 10 people when 5 can handle the job?
February 5th, 2008 at 1:12 pm
Yes, there will be fewer new dossiers coming in to process. But what about the ginormous backlog? We need all the matchers we can get right now in my opinion!
Vanessa
February 5th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
Is the poll new? When I click on it, it tells me I have already voted, but I have note voted in awhile.
Nancy
February 5th, 2008 at 1:46 pm
Do you suppose that babies are being moved from some of the more poor county orphanages to orphanages that are able to accomodate more children and are supported by programs like Half The Sky and LWB? Maybe that accounts from the larger population of children being reported at some of the orphanages. Our daughter is from a small county orphanage about 2 hours from Chenzhou, Hunan (a HTS orphanage), we visited her orphanage this summer and there was only 1 NSN baby who was 1 month old and 2 SN children who were away having surgery. The orphanage took excellent care of the few babies they had, no developmental delays and they were very well nourished but the orphanage was very old and not in great condition. It is not a wealthy part of China, our guide said the land is not fertile and mountainous so the farmers are poor plus there isn’t a lot of industry yet very few babies are abandonned or rather abandonned and taken to the local SWI. It’s just what we saw in that local area and certainly not representative of all of China. I too was surprised by the orphanage populations HTS has been reporting and it just got me thinking a little.
February 5th, 2008 at 2:05 pm
The numbers represent total children in the SWI–not necessarily children available for adoption. At my DD’s SWI, they have a lot of mentally disabled children who will never be available for adoption. Many of these children are older and will remain at the SWI for the rest of their lives.
klem
February 5th, 2008 at 2:08 pm
POLL Question – Is it just for those in the NSN program?
February 5th, 2008 at 2:28 pm
The CCAA did say that they were construction state of th e art rphanages , 12 I think. One way I this may go is that they will get the older orphanage or the way too rual orphans closer to beter care and it could help expidite process, I hope
February 5th, 2008 at 2:48 pm
when the huge flood of dossiers came in pre-may 07, more workers were needed to handle the flow.
now that there is barely a trickle, there is nothing for them to do.
these people can’t work matching children – there is still only X number of children to match, even if you have 20,000 people ready to do matching.
no biggie.
February 5th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
buzzbuzz,
My thoughts exactly.
February 5th, 2008 at 3:17 pm
Ummm….there is TONNES of work for them to do – the review room is over a year behind! Nobody logged in after November 06 even knows if China thinks they are eligible to remain in line.
February 5th, 2008 at 3:24 pm
“Nobody logged in after November 06 even knows if China thinks they are eligible to remain in line.”
What does that mean?
February 5th, 2008 at 3:31 pm
I’m not PIJill, but I think she means that if you haven’t been through the review room yet (which is for LIDs after November 2006) you wouldn’t know if you could still be pulled for whatever reason or remain “eligible”.
February 5th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
WOW! … I didn’t know that the Review Room was that Behind!
February 5th, 2008 at 3:35 pm
It means that only dossiers up to November 06 have been reviewed and accepted by China. Logging a dossier in just means it has been accepted to sit in a pile in the mail room, but China doesn’t approve you to adopt until after they review your dossier. Nobody accurately reports how many families do not make it through review.
Until you pass through review, you aren’t really in line, even if you have been waiting a year or more. LIDs after 11/06 are queued up in hopes of getting in line to adopt a child.
We aren’t in line, yet. LIDs after Nov06 are waiting to see if they can step into line to adopt, which only happens after their dossier passes review.
February 5th, 2008 at 3:48 pm
We were logged in for our daughter (sn) in August of 2005. I just saw a stat that families in the NSN program that were logged in Dec. of 2005 were just getting referrals. I had no idea that the system was so bogged down. Someone mentioned that the amount of dossiers being sent had dropped. Is that due to the slow down or the idea of less nsn babies available? We’d like to adopt again and know we will go the sn route, but with all the changes that are coming, I think it’s going to be a crap shoot no matter what program you’re in.
February 5th, 2008 at 4:01 pm
Anyone else having a hard time voting in the new LID poll? When I bring it up it states that I have already voted, which I have not.
February 5th, 2008 at 4:07 pm
Shelli-
Did you see a set of twins there? My friends in my LID group have a pair of NSN twins from there, that would have been there this summer…
Please pm me if you have any info. It would be awesome to surprise them with something!
February 5th, 2008 at 4:20 pm
Regarding the poll….I was able to vote but I was surprised to see January already bigger than March. I thought March was supposed to be a monster month. Of course it could be because…A) the poll is fairly new and B) People that are closer to referral are more likely to be at the RQ site in larger numbers than someone not expecting a referral for another 10 months or longer. Just my 2 cents,
February 5th, 2008 at 4:24 pm
RQ, I’d really like to know some more details about those 30 agencies if you know: Do you know if that is the number of included US agencies or the total number, all countries? Thanks!
February 5th, 2008 at 4:54 pm
who knows? maybe they are making their team more efficient, maybe they are hiring more people, maybe they know lots more than we do (just maybe). i still choose to believe that china loves their orphans as much as we do and they are doing everything they reasonably can to send us our babies. focusing negatively on the situation will only make our waits that much longer. think positive!!!
February 5th, 2008 at 5:01 pm
I dunno what to think anymore … Just as I was about to enter review, they clean out the review room … I’ll bet it’ll be 3-4 months before we hear Dec 06 out of review … Sniff sniff …
R
February 5th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
Can someone please direct me to the new poll? I’d like to cast a vote. Thank you.
February 5th, 2008 at 6:01 pm
How do you find out who the 30 agencies are that have access to the online SN program? My agency was not included.
February 5th, 2008 at 6:26 pm
someone quick vote in the poll!! We are at 666 votes.
February 5th, 2008 at 6:50 pm
Well, we are a devilish group :)
February 5th, 2008 at 7:09 pm
RQ, Are the orphanage numbers “official” and coming from a reliable source or just an estimate? My first thought was hmmm maybe there ARE more orphans than they are telling us. My second thought was maybe the person giving the numbers is inflating them a little bit in order to secure more dearly needed resources.
February 5th, 2008 at 7:25 pm
“Our agency was told that they should not expect many children with minor SN in the future (what falls into the category of minor SN was not specified). Most of the children on the CCAA SN website will have more severe SN (again, it was not specified what that is).”
**** What is going to happen to the minor SN children? Are they going to pass them off as NSN? Or will there miraculously be no more minor SN’s?
February 5th, 2008 at 8:37 pm
We can drive ourselves crazy trying to analyze something about which we ultimately know very little. Maybe everyone should study a little zen and calm down! I don’t mean to make light of this, but we really do ourselves no good by worrying about something we can in no way control.
February 5th, 2008 at 9:07 pm
Kyleigh….I totally agree with you. We all just rode the wave of “referrals”…let’s take a moment and basque in the slight movement ahead till Dec 27,2005.
This chatter reminds me of some indivduals I work with..they are always trying to stir up “Rumors” even is there is nothing to stir. Like you said there is just somethings we are never going to totally know about…
..ps It’s like office shuffles/shakeup’s never happen in North America….Ah I’d say…yes…sometimes a shuffle or so is a “good thing”
February 5th, 2008 at 9:08 pm
Ugh… my LID isn’t even on the poll! (01/08)
Prob. because we’ll be waiting forever…
February 5th, 2008 at 10:15 pm
I’m with you, waitinginMD as our LID is 1/10/2008 !!!!! It will be our DD #2 as we got our DD#1 on 1/4/07 (LID 8/15/05, Referral 11/2/06)
February 5th, 2008 at 10:16 pm
WaitinginMD:
Just curious…How long does your agency forecast your wait to be since you were JUST logged in? I hope you are 20 years old! Just kidding. Seriously, I’m curious what new people getting in this obscene line are actually expecting in terms of their wait. My agency is saying “26-27 months”. Sorry, can’t buy that.
February 5th, 2008 at 10:18 pm
waitinginMD and kakadumadu:
Keep us informed….I’ll be curious to see how long this wait takes you……..Hopefully, it’ll pick back up sometime in the near future!
February 5th, 2008 at 10:22 pm
I had heard the same info. Thanks for sharing. Just because there appears to be more children in orphanages
does not mean they are available for adoption. Where some people we know volunteer in a CWI, the Director there
does not want any of the babies to to to IA. In my dd’s
CWI, only a small percentage are available for IA, all the
children there are SN’s and they only release those they
consider adoptable. They have many more that they do
not make available for adoption.
I do know of, not personally, but was posted on a forum, someone who was denied their referral because they were
A/A. However, this had nothing to do with CCAA, but with the CWI Director. The child was a WC, and when she found out that the PAP’s were A/A she did not want to release the child. Long story short, they went to bring their
child home, only after their agency fought tooth and nail
for them.
All of this does not surprise me at all. I have heard for a long while that after they fullfil all the dossiers they will
close their NSN’s program. Of course this is just heresay
once again.
A/I do
February 6th, 2008 at 12:59 am
Can someone please tell me where to find the poll so I can vote. At least I hope I can LID 9/25/07 Sorry, it is probably right in front of me.
February 6th, 2008 at 1:17 am
Apparently it was too large…Never mind. Sorry.
February 6th, 2008 at 9:40 am
Hello, this is my first post, athough, I have been reading for a while. We are a mixed couple and the comment perked my interest. With a LID of 2-24-06, we have passed the review room. We have passed the review room, so I guess that means my DH being biracial wasn’t an issue! We sent plent of photos of our blended families.
February 6th, 2008 at 10:40 am
Hi Luvluv Thanks for that , we are also and been hearing some things like this that was getting me a little worried, on top of all the other stuff.
February 6th, 2008 at 12:11 pm
I’m having problems with the new poll, too. When I pull it up, it says I have already voted, but I know I haven’t! RQ – am I doing something wrong?
February 6th, 2008 at 2:18 pm
I don;t know guys — I just got my LOA in 83 days — which for our agency, for LIDs that have NOT gone thru review yet (I am a 3/19/07 LID) this LOA was pretty darn quick — maybe they’re streamlining the process??
FC
February 6th, 2008 at 3:53 pm
I also agree that it isn’t necessarily bad news. Perhaps I am incorrect, but assuming that a “contract” employee is sort of like our “temporary” employee designation, they may indeed be diverted to a different job. If you work directly for the Chinese government (like the CCAA), I don’t think it is uncommon to be moved around at the government’s discretion.
February 6th, 2008 at 4:18 pm
was just thinking the same thing, we use a manpower service at our store for busy periods, When we see someone who works really well and seems suited to the postion. We hire them after the contract is over with the manpower firm. Could be that if somebody was contracted to work in one part of the CCAA and learned the ropes that they may be hired by the CCAA later. either full time or part time.
February 6th, 2008 at 5:12 pm
Please help! Does anyone know who the 30 agencies who are still placing SN children are? I know we can’t name agencies here, but I would love any info (you can PM me.) We are considering our second SN adoption and want to get in touch with agencies that are still receiving WC lists.
Thanks for any help.
February 6th, 2008 at 5:24 pm
I am confused. Is there a new poll out there? The only thing that I could seem to find was one that included lids from 12/15/2005 to 02-12-2006??
I am 03-29-2006
thanks
February 6th, 2008 at 6:27 pm
codyexpress: There’s a purple box right next to the latest RQ bog entry that says, “LID POLL”. You will find you can vote your March 2006 LID.
February 6th, 2008 at 6:45 pm
sllflorida-
Thanks for your help. It still took me a few moments to find… Has the purple box always been there or does it just blend in? Or I guess maybe I am always just looking straight for the rumors! It showed that I have already voted so I guess I must have?
thanks again,
February 6th, 2008 at 7:56 pm
Can someone help the technically challenged learn how to PM?
Thank you!
February 6th, 2008 at 8:02 pm
on the racial question, i know a mixed couple, the man of chinese ancestry and the woman african-american, who adopted a beautiful girl from china at the same time we adopted our daughter in 2005.
February 6th, 2008 at 9:24 pm
Not to change the subject, but just wanted to remind everybody about the premier if Ni Hao Kai Lan tomorrow morning. Set your vcr’s or dvr’s or tivos!
thanks, maya’s daddy
http://www.nickjr.com/shows/ni-hao-kai-lan/index.jhtml
February 7th, 2008 at 1:23 am
Maybe this will bring in new and better changes?? Maybe new people will be hired that will be quicker???? I’m praying for the best!!!!
Happy Chinese New Year everyone!!
His,
Mrs. U
mommy to Elizabeth, born in Yangchun, Guangdong, PRC
http://www.makingahouseahome.blogspot.com
February 7th, 2008 at 3:01 pm
I suspect if employees will be replaced it will be by government employees –
i.e. the Chinese government likely will begin to control their adoption program from within.
it could mean this is no longer an impartial system.
and perhaps no longer a program of integrity?