A picture is worth a thousand words
The graphic below represents the data from the poll that closed January 1st of this year.
The poll numbers for each month are 60, 184, 102, 79, 107, 117, 65, 61, and 89. The average is 96.
I’m putting this out here now for two reasons, the first is that it’s pretty much the end of this poll and it’s time, but the second is that I want people to understand that a nine day batch doesn’t really mean all that much. If you’re doing the marble thing then yeah, it’s great to take nine marbles out of your jar. But as far as the NSN line speeding up or slowing down, this month was a less than average month.
I’m not trying to be a party pooper here, just trying to point out the reality.
My biggest question of the moment has to do with the 22 days between referrals. I’m not going to do a lot of math on it just yet, but suffice it to say that if the CCAA kept batch sizes the same but put them out at shorter intervals it would be a speed up. I want to see this happen again before I start speculating or doing any math, though. And to be clear, I’ve heard zero rumors that this is the plan. I’m just curious about it and letting my mind wander.
September 4th, 2008 at 9:46 am
My take on the 22 days is that this is simply a one time correction to get them back on their once a months schedule. For whatever reason referrals had dragged a bit too far into the next month and they have made the correction.
September 4th, 2008 at 10:03 am
They’ve never cared about that before Windthrow. Never.
They’ve always managed to get referrals out about every 32 days or so on average, and have never cared how the calendar months fall.
Here is the history, in order, of days that referrals fall on:
17, 18, 25, 24, 29, 1, 3, 10, 8, 2, 25, 27, 27, 27, 26, 26, 31, 24, 25, 2, 30, 3, 1, 5, 6, 1, 5, 5, 2, 3, 2, 2, 5, 31, 1, 3, 4, 2, 9, 7, 11, 2
As you can see, it’s all over the place. Most calendar months have one referral, but some have none and some have two. The CCAA has never cared about that before, and have made it clear that they don’t. When they have a longer than normal month they tend to make the next one shorter than normal and it all averages out. So, what will happen next month? Last month was 35 days, was this month shorter in part because last month was longer? Still, it wasn’t a record long month, and this was a record short month (by a long shot). So, I’m curious.
September 4th, 2008 at 10:42 am
I have a theory that maybe they matched all the way through Feb. 9 LAST month and split it in half. Why do I think this?
Well, one reason is that they sent out another batch only 22 days after the last batch AND that 22 days included the Olympics. That’s just unheard of.
Secondly, last month’s batch ended Jan. 31, which is smack in the middle of the CNY holiday. Why do that?
So I think it’s possible that they really matched through Feb. 9 last month, and split it in half so that they could get another batch out relatively quickly after the Olympics. I’m sure that even though they were supposedly open for the Olympics, there was a fear that many workers couldn’t get in or that something else might delay them. So getting a batch ready ahead of time and then sending it later would give them a couple of weeks breathing room.
September 4th, 2008 at 10:42 am
I’m confused with this graph as the previous poll (link at right, closed May 22, 2008) shows 0 LIDs for Feb. 11, and 1 LID for Feb. 12th, yet that’s different than above (2 and 16).
September 4th, 2008 at 11:37 am
anonymouswait – reread the first paragraph of this post.
The part that says The graphic below represents the data from the poll that closed January 1st of this year.
September 4th, 2008 at 11:50 am
amycate it’s a really good point what are you doing with the baby that was referred and is not even 6 months old?
If this baby was ready to be referred LAST month and they split it it means this one was VERY young. The youngest until now which is really surprising.
But I find your point really interesting.
September 4th, 2008 at 11:58 am
We will have to agree to disagree on that one RQ. I think it cant be just a coincidence that the average number of days is so close to being an exact month.
September 4th, 2008 at 12:08 pm
amycate,
That is exactly what I have been thinking for a while. By doing that, it allowed the CCAA to address the Olympics but still “appear” to do referrals. I think it will be interesting to see what now happens since the Olympics have ended. I know it won’t be anything too visible but I do think we will see some subtle changes. I have been somewhat involved in adoptions from China for the past 8 years now. Nothing surprises me.
Beth
LID DD #2 4/21/06
September 4th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
windthrow,
Maybe I’m misunderstanding, but I don’t think RQ is saying that it’s a coincidence that the average is close to a month, I think she’s saying they don’t really care if referrals come at the beginning, the middle or the end of the month.
September 4th, 2008 at 1:00 pm
Apsara Says:
September 4th, 2008 at 11:50 am
amycate it’s a really good point what are you doing with the baby that was referred and is not even 6 months old?
**********************
I believe I’ve seen other babies in the 5 1/2 month range on the list before, so I don’t know if that is anything that conflicts with my theory or not.
Who knows though? I’m just speculating. :)
September 4th, 2008 at 1:47 pm
windthrow,
The western calendar and keepings on track in a western way is just not what China does. Even their holidays while being close to yearly and around the same time are lunar based,,,,, close to a month but not……………..
Just like they work by LIDs not days,,,,,,,,,,,, to it somewhat sane they so far have either rounded up or down, depending on your point of view to close out a day but days and months are just not what they do. No comment on right or fair……..
Just is…………………..
September 4th, 2008 at 2:46 pm
My daughter was under 6 mths when we got her referral back in 2004. I’m not sure how many of you were around then but even then there was talk of the HUGE slowdown of referrals before the Olympics and then a speed up. Fingers crossed that is right, especially since the first part was accurate.
September 4th, 2008 at 3:59 pm
Oops.
September 4th, 2008 at 4:10 pm
ChloeBaga I hope you are correct and that a speed up will happen like last time. There’s always hope. Always.
September 4th, 2008 at 4:33 pm
RQ, Since we’ve pretty much finished up with the poll that closed Jan 1st, are you considering putting up a new poll? It may sound silly but knowing I’ll be able to vote in your next LID poss seems like a HUGE step in the right direction.
Just curious….
Thanks for all you do!
September 4th, 2008 at 6:45 pm
How can someone have a logn date on the weekend. Don’t they have weekends off?
September 4th, 2008 at 6:50 pm
Congrats to everyone who got referrals!!!
Does anyone have any explanation or guess as to why some referrals are 6 months and some are 3 years?? I don’t understand the huge gap in ages. I know some people request an older child but it sounds like some people request a baby and then get referred a toddler?? If there was truly a shortage of children wouldn’t every referral be for a fairly young child??
September 4th, 2008 at 8:01 pm
still dreaming of china,
Children are abandoned at various points; they aren’t all abandoned as newborns. Perhaps that was the case for the 3 yo you mentioned. There was a toddler in our travel group who had been abandoned about five months previous.
September 4th, 2008 at 8:36 pm
9 days, is 9 days in my book!!! Especially since they’re now only 13 days from my LID!!! I know there was nothing logged in on half those days blah blah blah… but it’s 9 days closer to seeing our loooonnnngggg awaited child.
And I’m sure that for those who are logged in in 2008, 9 days certainly sounds better than 2!!
Thanks for doing the polls RQ! They are a good visual to get an idea of who busy things were, as opposed to the lower numbers in Feb ’06.
September 4th, 2008 at 8:53 pm
Aust, I’m thinking your year-end holidays are going to be very exciting this year.
:-D
September 4th, 2008 at 10:09 pm
still dreaming of china Says … Exactly
Add me to the list of skeptics.
Look at the numbers people. The slow down was clearly orchestrated; I don’t know what more people need to finally believe it.
September 5th, 2008 at 12:00 am
I would love to see shorter periods of time between referrals. Maybe they could speed things up a bit that way? I feel for all of my friends that are continuing to agonize over the wait.
Wendy
http://adoptionandfire.typepad.com
September 5th, 2008 at 12:21 am
“If there was truly a shortage of children wouldn’t every referral be for a fairly young child??”
Not necessarily. There’s not necessarily a shortage of children, but rather a shortage of healthy female infants, which is what the majority of PAPS have requested. Also, toddlers may very well come from SWI’s that have recently joined the IA program.
September 5th, 2008 at 12:22 am
Sorry to share bad news but our agency told us pretty definitively
( based on what info I’m not sure) that we should not expect any speedup. They completely retracted previous statements about the slowdown being due to the Olympics. They now claim that “abandonments are down and domestic adoptions are up” and that China began to intentionally slow down the program when they initiated the new requirements.
September 5th, 2008 at 12:35 am
pandamomma – guess how long the wait is for a SN boy …
Yup, it’s exactly the same ;)
September 5th, 2008 at 12:37 am
AKSC – What a surprise the agency had this epiphany only once the Olympics had ended!
September 5th, 2008 at 8:20 am
Like I said before…no raining on anyone’s parade…but a “9″ day batch aka “real 4″ since CCAA was closed from 1-5th..is ok with me…..CCAA just made the Aug and Sept batches much more palitable and psychologically easier to digest…bravo for them…they used the closure days of Chinese NY to their benefit…Folks…stop over analyzing this to death…we are up to Feb 9th, 2006… any way you slice it…..and we are 35 LID’s away from referral…
….And I agree it is time for a new poll… some of the data goes back to December 15th…nothing personal but those folks are long home with their children…
September 5th, 2008 at 8:22 am
ps…I really don’t think there is going to be a drastic speed up…5,6,7 day batches are to come……BUT again that’s OK because that’s movement…..inch by inch…think +ve everyone…
September 5th, 2008 at 9:19 am
I, too, have been thinking like amycate that they matched all the way through Feb 9th already before the last batch came out, but for other reasons. I became suspicious because there were absolutely no rumors, neither of that the matching had begun or of any cut off and because this batch came so quickly. To me, it seems that was because it was already ready.
September 5th, 2008 at 12:09 pm
p12 –
Exactly what I thought!
September 5th, 2008 at 2:18 pm
p12 –
Actually the wait for a SN boy is much much shorter. I can tell you as a two time SN only family the wait for a son is very short as most people request girls thinking that is what is most available. It is a very sad road for a SN boy. If they are not adopted by age 3, their chances of finding a family are very grim. If your agency is telling you that boys are just as long of a wait as girls in the SN they are misinformed. Ask any SN family and they will tell you that there are many many boys on the lists. Girls get families first boys second. Our first SN adoption was using one of the larger chinese only agency. When we approached them about a second, the informed us that there we about 200 families ahead of us waiting for SN referrals and that it was taking 8 mo – one year to receive a referral. When I mentioned we were interested in a SN boy they told me we could expect a referral within a couple months as most people overlook the boys. And they get jsut as many boy children as girls.
It saddens me that more families are not able to access the SN program due to their country of origin or agencys participation. It saddens me more that there are so many handsome boys out there waiting for families that get overlooked by families thinking only girls are available or that boys are very hard to find.
I would NEVER advocate for someone to switch to SN for a faster referral…… but if you are open to or thinking about the SN program and are thinking the wait for a SN is getting longer then I would advocate on behalf of the boys. Take a look and see that the referral for a waiting child son is much faster than a waiting child daughter.
samba in sac
http://www.talesfromthebigtomato.blogspot.com
September 5th, 2008 at 2:25 pm
Any agency who claims to know anything definitively, should be taken with a grain of salt.
September 5th, 2008 at 8:09 pm
p12 wrote:
“pandamomma – guess how long the wait is for a SN boy …
Yup, it’s exactly the same ;)”
If that’s so, then why is it that my agency can match a family with a sn’s child (male or female) with minor/correctable sn’s within 2-8 weeks off of the shared list?
September 6th, 2008 at 9:17 am
Here’s a theory: The orphanage directors “know” about how many IA paperwork they can handle and “earmark” a baby when it first comes in as a good candidate or not for either domestic or IA. It may be looks (minority babies are not as desirable as Han) as we were told by guides. So it may take 6 months for the baby to reach adoptable age but they’ve already told the CCAA about how many they’ve got coming up (paper stacks) to them the next month. I believe it’s the hesitancy on the part of the orphanages that is mainly to blame on the slow down. Maybe they have a full orphanage or not, but the whole IA is not as incouraged as it once was. Still it has to be a deliberate thing. Are we still increasing wait time by one month each month?
September 6th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
Someone mentioned about the age gaps and someone responded they are abandoned at different ages. That is maybe ue, but my daughter (PA received yesterday!!) was abandoned at 2 days old and we are waiting for our RA, which will probably not come before her 3rd birthday in December. She is spending at least 3 YEARS in the system, and that makes me just so sad. Why must some of these children wait so long to go home to their family!?
September 6th, 2008 at 5:33 pm
Katri – You may be right, at least partly…my agency reported that the CCAA was working with Orphanages on the paperwork process and also to try to get more Orphanges to work with them. Hopefully, the increase in the Orphange fee will help them to come on board. So I think there are many factors involved.