Projections
Once again we have seen a referral batch at worse than horrid. As has been pointed out, the April batch was for only two days last year. Technically it was for three days this year since a weekend fell in the time referred and those days show very little activity on the polls. No matter how you look at it, it wasn’t good. It wasn’t the worst ever, but that’s not much consolation right now.
If you’d like to take a historical look of how many days have been referred you can always go to the Histories Page. That page also tells us that the wait is now close enough to 27 months to call it 27 months.
For those who want to look at raw numbers, here is the size (in poll numbers) of the previous batches and this batch. Please remember that you can’t compare numbers from different polls. It’s like looking at a citywide map and statewide map and trying to say that an inch on this one took ten minutes so an inch on that one should take ten minutes. It doesn’t work. Still, you can get an idea of how the sizes of the batches have gone.
You also need to have an idea of how previous months have gone on the Horrid/Bad/Mid/Good case scenarios. I originally started out with Bad and Good and later added a mid case. Last year the Horrid case became a necessity since the bad case no longer told how bad things could get. As I’ve explained before, I’m keeping the labels the same so we can look at this over a long term and get an idea of how things have worked out.
And finally, here are my projections:
And to end this with my standard disclaimer: As always, projections are based on the CCAA continuing to do what they have been doing. There is nothing to say they will follow their recent behavior. They could choose to do a lot less, or a lot more.
April 17th, 2008 at 1:08 pm
Wow, it’s been a long time since things were even “Mid Case”
……oh, and BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
April 17th, 2008 at 1:14 pm
I wonder… if we go through a year of consistently worse than horrid batches to get a new category? or scrap/revamp the old ones? Because there is a sad, cynical part of my soul that thinks “horrid” is the “New normal”.
RQ - I salute the time and effort you put into this site and the calculations. I know I’m statistically challenged and couldn’t do it!
I also appreciate you putting so much time into it when you’ve got your own job and family to tend to. (How is TT doing? I hope she’s better and you’re getting some rest yourself.)
Tracy
LID 1-12-06 Next? or will it be June?
http://dayadopt.blogsome.com
April 17th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
Thanks for taking the time away from TT to put this together. Hope she is doing much better. I know how scary it is to have a baby in the hospital.
Our projections are very similar, it helps to have someone with more info put these numbers out there so that we can keep a realistic approach to the wait. Will there be a poll with March and April 2006 in it coming up sometime?
April 17th, 2008 at 1:41 pm
I should have added… of course I **hope** we don’t have a year of horrid or worse than horrid batches!
Tracy
LID 1-12-06 Next? or will it be June?
http://dayadopt.blogsome.com
April 17th, 2008 at 2:20 pm
Thanks for the analysis! Hope everyone is feeling better. Proposed category: Atrocious?
April 17th, 2008 at 3:11 pm
Wow, that “Histories” page is a pretty dismal sight. Its hard to believe that the wait increases by almost a month every month or so. Bummer.
Thanks for your projections RQ. Hope you and TT are well.
RQ~ Would you think you might be doing a new poll in june or july perhaps?
April 17th, 2008 at 4:04 pm
Hi
I have a report from an agencies site(not ours) that the next LID expected is through 1-16-06. I will keep checking the next couple of weeks.
April 17th, 2008 at 4:12 pm
Are referrals expected the first week in May (May 5)?
LID June 07 and still holding on to hope
April 17th, 2008 at 4:25 pm
At the horrid case, we’re looking at 5 months to get through January 06… and that wasn’t a huge month. So, with a LID of early Sept. 2006, I better start wrapping my brain around 2012. BARF…
April 17th, 2008 at 4:28 pm
I just want to know how RQ’s baby girl is doing…….
April 17th, 2008 at 4:30 pm
Wait4ever, thanks for posting the agency rumor.
I wonder about that agency’s track record, do you know anything? Jan 10-16 sounds like an awfully big batch if you look at poll numbers. I have to wonder if they are just counting days ( i.e. guessing at 7 day batches)
it’d certainly be great if it were true though!
April 17th, 2008 at 4:34 pm
Hi all -
My first time to post here, but RQ has been a lifeline for those of us waiting in the trenches (it’s been 2+ years for me). For that, I am grateful RQ. Thank you.
I’ve taken the time to get a password and log in because I continue to be disenheartened by the titles you put on your projections.
Let’s face it. We’re looking at 3-5 years. This is our life. And I just hate reading about “bad” and “horrid” over and over again. Can the terminology not be more objective, less negative? Especially for the folks just starting the process. Those babies will still need homes in 5 years and who wants to sign up for something that is described as “horrid”?
I am an RQ believer and appreciate all the time you put into the statistics. But, I’d appreciate it if the wait I have to endure could be described with a little less doomsday rhetoric.
April 17th, 2008 at 4:51 pm
Changing the word from “horrid” to something else doesn’t make it any less horrid. It’s just terminology.
April 17th, 2008 at 4:55 pm
I understand what you are saying but, for the people that started a couple years ago and were told by their agencies that they would have there baby home in 9 months after their log in date and it is now taking 2-3 years……the wait and disappointment it is horrid for us.
LID:April 11, 2006
April 17th, 2008 at 5:03 pm
Waiting for Emily,
I said the same thing a few months back! It’s hard to pace yourself when the situation keeps getting worse every month. Now, in order to feel better, I just add the words, “with sugar on top” to any of the current scenarios listed and I feel better because I am ending on a postive note. I sound crazy but my sense of humor is the only thing I have left to keep me going. Hang in there.
By the by, RQ won’t change the names because she wants to maintain consistency with her projections and if she changes the name every time the situation becomes horrific, she will lose that great feature about them. And that is something many of us highly respect. Take care, I feel your pain.
Stef
LID 2/6/06
PS. RQ, I am glad to hear you and TT are on the mend. Her illness had to be awful.
April 17th, 2008 at 5:16 pm
I don’t think anyone needs to feel as though they’re walking on eggshells here. The wait - it’s ‘horrid’. Any other adjective describing the wait won’t make it any prettier. We’re all in this together and thanks to RQ as long as we stay within the guidelines, we can voice our frustration and in return, we usually get wonderful words of support from others. Thank goodness for that - this is what helps us - and maybe for just a few minutes or so, these kinds words of support makes our wait, your wait, everyone’s wait, well, just a bit less ‘horrid’.
The wait stinks - period. But, we all know in the long run this very ‘horrid’ wait will be so well worth it. That afterall, is why we’re all still here, right?
April 17th, 2008 at 5:35 pm
I agree with m3Says and scandwaiting - it is just terminology. It isn’t meant to bring anyone down or offend in any way. Those of us who were told way different time frames (we were told 15 months MAX) do think the trend of referrals is “horrid”.
W8ingforChina
LID 3.20.07
Anti Spam word: Shamian - will I ever get there?
April 17th, 2008 at 5:40 pm
My LID is March 21, 2006 and I agree the wait is disappointing. But, horrid? I think of tsunamis and disease as horrid. I guess I’m more of a glass-half-full kind of person. It sucks, but it’s the reality. As I said, I’m dependent and grateful for RQs projections, but I’d rather not look at the numbers and know that what I’m going through is considered bad or horrid. Can’t it be just A,B,C,D or something?
April 17th, 2008 at 5:43 pm
I’m not so put off by the connotation (sp?) of “horrid” in connection with the wait - this wait *is* brutal. But to me, the term horrid as in horrid case scenario implies that it would be unlikely to happen - and yet it happens every month. I’m with tlday13 from a post above that “horrid” has become the norm!
April 17th, 2008 at 5:44 pm
My LID is March 21, 2006 and I agree the wait is disappointing. But, horrid? I think of tsunamis and disease as horrid. I guess I’m more of a glass-half-full kind of person. It sucks, but it’s the reality. As I said, I’m dependent and grateful for RQs projections, but I’d rather not look at the numbers and be reminded that what I’m going through is considered bad or horrid. Can’t it be just A,B,C,D or something?
Good point about maintaining consistency, though…
April 17th, 2008 at 6:14 pm
I actually think the word “horrid” is MUCH nicer than some other words that have rolled around in my head to describe a small batch! =)
April 17th, 2008 at 6:15 pm
But just because Horrid seems to be the current norm, doesn’t mean it isn’t horrid.
And, what happens when, if, (hopefully) things start picking back up again. If I change the labels now then I’d just have to change them again later.
Changing the labels every six months is very shortsighted.
Consistency, that’s what I’m going for.
————-
As for the agency saying the next LID expected is January 16, what I’ve seen happen many times is an agency says, “Our next LID is 01/16″. Often they aren’t saying they expect those people to get referrals, just that this is their next LID group. I’d like to see the exact wording from the agency, in context, if someone could send that to me privately, please.
April 17th, 2008 at 6:30 pm
Eli,This is an agency I really don’t know anything about. My friend’s agency is very reliable and they were only off 1 day last month. I will keep checking that site. Any news, I will report ASAP. I too hope for a big batch. I am keeping my hopes up for a dramtic change come the end of the year. Otherwise, it looks like we will have a 2012 date. LID 1-17-07… and very bummed out!
April 17th, 2008 at 6:57 pm
You are simply amazing RQ. As a waiting Mom my head is the clouds and full of fuzz, so you are truly amazing to be still here for us all, as well as your family and little TT who needs you so.
As we draw closer to the middle of Jan 2006 LID’s and Dec is the first column in your Poll of “when is your LID date”, oh how I’d love to see another LID poll as March being so much bigger is getting closer. Maybe there are others for late January and Feb who are here now, and never did vote the first time. Just a thought amongst my fog.
April 17th, 2008 at 7:06 pm
well I guess it’s OK to do some serious travel now…..
since the waits are so long and I have waaay too many hours
of paid days off!
thank you Rumor Queen!
I can plan and keep living , so the wait won’t be horrid too!
April 17th, 2008 at 9:22 pm
Actually, my own words for the long wait and small batches is just a ‘big, huge bummer’! Keeping my chin up here - You never know when referrals **will** start to pick up! :)
LID 2/11/07
April 17th, 2008 at 9:34 pm
Waiting for Emily
You clearly understand the power of language. Many don’t. I get you, and I’m sure others do as well.
The director of my agency was in China last week and she says they are expecting things to slow down further. I won’t label that news with an adjective; it is what it is. It’s not what I expected, but it’s not horrid either.
April 18th, 2008 at 9:07 am
Did anyone notice that according to RQ’s projections that last April was 2 days long and then bounced back to some substantial numbers? I am hoping it’s a trend and not the exception.
Stef
April 18th, 2008 at 11:45 am
The wait is what it is, and nothing more.
Here’s a thought, is it possible that this past group was smaller due to the lingering aftereffects of the winter storms in China? If so, then we may be seeing a “catch up” phase coming as orphanages get their paperwork up to date.
As to the name of the projections, they do have a depressing connotation, but I can understand the need for consistency.
Has anybody else noticed that nearly everything from this agency/that agency person who just visited China, this inside CCAA source, that visiting CCAA employee, etc. has one thing in common — It’s WRONG somehow!! Hey, there’s that consistency thing again!
LID 1-12-06
April 20th, 2008 at 4:02 pm
kyleigh~
Not sure if we’re with the same agency but I was told the same thing a month or so ago. It would get worse and pick up (notice I didn’t say speed up) in the Fall…hmmm before and after the Olympics - where’s the smiley with the lightbulb.
Jo-Anne