The Current Backlog
In June of 2007 I figured the backlog was around the 29,000 mark, and I had enough confirmation from other sources that it was close to 30,000 that I have no problems believing it.
If we are to believe the backlog is now 12,000, then we’d have to believe that in 19 months the backlog has dropped by 17,000 families. About 900 families per month. Sorry, but I don’t buy it when there have been so few referrals a month. I can’t believe more than 600 families a month, maybe more than 700 per month, have dropped out.
But let’s do the math, anyway.
From this post we know that (approximately):
Total CCAA Numbers (shown per month : per year)
2007 716 : 8,600
Special Needs CCAA Numbers (shown per month : per year)
2007 200 : 2,400
Non-Special Needs CCAA Numbers (shown per month : per year)
2007 516 : 6,200
In 2008 there is reason to believe that the total numbers numbers are down by 60%, and that the NSN numbers are down even farther than that. Which means it’s possible that in 2007 there were closer to 250 referrals a month on average. Or less.
There is also word that the CCAA may only be receiving 150 to 200 or so dossiers a month now. Which means that the backlog might actually be going down now. Let’s say that in the remainder of 2007 the backlog went down by 100 a month and in 2007 it also went down by about 100 a month. It’s probably not going down that much, but we’ll estimate high in order to try to reach that 12,000 number. That means the total backlog went down by about 1900 dossiers. And let’s assume that half of the SN referrals each month came from waiting NSN families. We’ll say another 100 a month, for another 1900 dossiers. That brings us down to around 25,200 families.
But what about attrition, I hear you say.
Some attrition is already being put in play by my adding in people who’ve switched from NSN to SN above. But that doesn’t account for those who’ve just pulled out without switching to SN.
We’d already put a huge attrition number in place back in June of 2007. We figured enough attrition to take us from what should have been 38,000 down in the 29,000 range. That’s 24%. Our attrition poll figured the total attrition at 24.5%. And the attrition for 2007 (and I’m assuming 2008) at much less. The total 2006 attrition number was 30% though, so I have no problems adding another 5% on now – that combined with the figures taken out for NSN switches to SN should take care of what didn’t get figured in when we did it in 2007, plus it should account for those who have been logged in and pulled out in the past 18 months. That brings us to 23,750. And that fits with what I heard a few months ago, that the backlog had made it under 25,000.
I cannot put enough attrition in there at this point to take it down another 50% to put it in the 12,000 range. I might not have too much problem adding another five percent, but any more than that doesn’t seem possible at this point in time. Even if we figured that every single SN adoption in the past 18 months was a family switching from NSN, we still would not get close to 12,000. And that is not the case, as most people starting the program now are doing so as SN, not joining the NSN line. Saying that half came from the NSN backlog was probably too much. But, again, I’m estimating high to try to reach the 12,000 figure, and still not getting close to it.
The point is that there is no way I can mathematically get the backlog down to the 12,000 range. And I sincerely doubt the figure was for Canadian families. North American families… maybe. But I’ve never seen the CCAA give out figures that way before.
March 1st, 2009 at 2:17 pm
Hello !
Don’t know what happened to my previous comment on RQ’s previous post, which I called “off topic”, as it was indeed. It did not appear (wasn’t approved? I have no clue).
Now that RQ doing her maths again, it is not anymore (off subject).
The thing I had proposed earlier was to get the real actual figures by asking our agencies/NGO whatever they are arounf the world.
As to me, I could easily come back to you with the French figures for all NGO with the split NSN/SN.
Then, one or more PAP per receiving country, depending on the # of agencies, could ask the number of files waiting (SN and NSN) in each agency or NGO, and this for :
- USA
- Spain (olà, are there some spanish on RQ? I guess so)
- Canada
- Holland
- Sweden (Hej hej)
- Denmark
- UK
- Autralia
- Belgium
- Finland
- Ireland
- Island
Only then can we have an accurate shot of the situation.
Best regards.
Please RQ, let my post being published (can not see why it was not previously).
Marianne from France
March 1st, 2009 at 2:29 pm
No reason for that comment to be held back, not sure why you think it will.
But, it won’t work. The US does not keep track of how many US dossiers are sitting in the CCAA’s holding rooms.
They keep track of how many baby visa’s are issued, but that’s it.
Maybe a few smaller countries may have that figure, but I doubt most countries would know.
March 1st, 2009 at 2:30 pm
I still think the 12,000 could have been referring to the number of LIDS left in 2006. RQ, is this possible according to your calculations?
March 1st, 2009 at 3:04 pm
Maybe those rumors of a speedup this year are not so far off if we look at the numbers referred in 2008…If referrals go back up to 2007 numbers, it will seem like a speed up.
March 1st, 2009 at 4:53 pm
Can’t comment on the issue of backlog numbers, but I can tell you that I was talking to my friend last night, who’s file was sent in March 2007, and of her original batch of 5 families, only 2 remain, all others have pulled their files, so that is 60% attrition, which is a little higher than I would have expected, but is fact.
There are 2 earlier batches than her’s from our State and both them have had several families pull their files (don’t know exact numbers on these, just that they are no longer all waiting), so maybe attrition is getting much higher the longer the wait and the more uncertain it becomes, with regular 2 day batches, many families I have spoken with are thinking about alternatives for building their families, as they feel it could be 5+ years still before they see a referal!
March 1st, 2009 at 5:00 pm
I was told by the Director of a very reputable agency, it wasn’t China only, that they knew for a fact that there was 25,000 + dossiers in China. This was in 2005 before we decided on adopting our ds in 2006. He also said that it is increasing all the time. This is what he said, not what I know.
March 1st, 2009 at 5:12 pm
based on 25,000 families – if there was no attrition and the ccaa stayed permanently at 2008 referral numbers, that’s about seven years to get through the backlog.
obviously there will be attrition…but who knows if the ccaa will start issuing more referrals or less….while we’ve had some hope for more referrals in 2007 vs. 2008, we have yet to see it in the three months thus far (assuming the 3/06 cut-off is correct) and the numbers have declined every year since 2005.
March 1st, 2009 at 6:50 pm
On the subject of back log & wait times I was wondering if someone better at numbers than myself would help me out. I am not a math person…not at all! English is my thing! I often struggle to figure out the what I know are clear, simple to understand graphs that RQ is so kind to supply us with. I just stare at them most of the time. Mostly I think it is because we are still not on them most of the time as we are still so far out. I have in my mind done the very simple math from time to time, but for those of you that are numbers people & do totally get the graphs-give it to me straight, would you? For a LID of 07/20/07~if things continue at or at about the current rate, how much longer for us? I think when I figured it I got something like it could be five MORE years on top of the two we have waited thus far. I mean, I know that logically with attrition & the new regs, not to mention the drastically reduced number of dossiers now coming in that at some point things will change, but how much is the question. We are waiting irregardless. We are doing things in an attempt to grow our family in the meantime & will continue to do so. We have attempted two domestic adoptions while we have been waiting already~both were disrupted. The first, we were at the hospital with her for two days. The day that we were to take her home the birthmother’s sister chose to parent at the last minute. The second, we had our sweet “Emma Kate” for four days & two hours before the cut off to make the TPR irreversible, the birthmother chose to parent. She was essentially homeless, 19 & sweet Emma made child number three under three. Maybe we have “fools” tatooed on our foreheads, but we would try again tomorrow if the opportunity presented itself. We are also planning to do InVitro as well. We did choose to let our I-171H lapse & become a Hague case. Due to our specific circumstances, this was what made sense for us. We are hopeful that one day our Mia will be placed in our arms, but we will continue to move forward with every option available to grow our family in the meantime. Anyway, if someone would be so kind~what do you get when you figure an LID of 07/20/07? Figuring it as if things stay as they are now, of course. I know obviously, figuring it this way is worst case scenario, but better to get this date in my head & deal with it. Anything sooner will just be a blessing. Thanx!
March 1st, 2009 at 6:54 pm
Is it possible that 12000 files are in the matching room only. Maybe that number does not include after March 2007 files that are still in review process. Just a thought!
March 1st, 2009 at 7:22 pm
prayter and toolong – I dunno. Sure, it is possible it could be a count of what is left to do of the 2006 LIDs, but it seems doubtful it would be a count of the files between review and matching, that number should be a good bit higher than 15,000 because of the huge push of families logged in before the new rules. Unfortunately, I don’t think we can use that number as a reliable number for much of anything at this point.
One optimistic person suggested that if the CCAA is about to speed up but doesn’t want a big deal to be made of it that they might try to understate the files left to do so they can say they didn’t speed up so much as there just weren’t that many files for the time period so it seems a speed up when it really wasn’t. Since it is rare for them to give these kinds of numbers, it’s perhaps not a totally off-the-wall conspiracy theory type thought.
Unless some other agencies hear it though, I’m not giving a lot of weight to that 12,000 number at all at this point. I’m not saying the agency made it up, it is very possible that their contact at CCAA gave it to them. Either someone who was asked a question and didn’t know the answer so came up with something to keep from having to say “I don’t know”, or something along the conspiracy theory lines, or a number passed from person to person with the description of the number not being passed correctly.
JourneytoMia – I’m sorry but I don’t think anyone has your answer. You can go to the forecast site and that will tell you what your referral will be if things keep up as they have been, but that doesn’t tell you whether or not things may change between now and then.
March 1st, 2009 at 7:52 pm
Rumor Queen-
Where did the numbers for your analysis come from? Was there a point that an agency (or more) reported the first set of numbers and the last set of numbers? Or was it analysis from your own polls?
Also, who says now that there are only 12,000 backlogged? An agency or CCAA itself?
I tend to believe that there is more attrition than most people assume. People simply do not want to wait 3 years for a promise that it won’t get longer than 4 years, without anything substantial to make them believe all the waiting will come to an end. If we had not already adopted, and IF our first adoption was our first child, I would feel compelled to quit the wait myself.
March 1st, 2009 at 7:58 pm
oops…posted before I saw other responses. Some of the answers are already spelled out here.
March 1st, 2009 at 9:12 pm
JourneytoMia – i’m so sorry for your losses. as far as when you might receive a referral – it’s just too far out to estimate. an educated guess can be made about the next month or two (march/april) but beyond that there are too many factors…
as far as the 12,000 number. didn’t the same agency say that the ccaa was matching 650 families this month and 850 next month? no way. that’s way too many when most months they’ve averaged 250.
didn’t the ccaa say in december 2006 there were 25,000-30,000 families waiting? i could be wrong but i thought that was the case?
so say 27,500. that would have been for oct/nov/dec 05 and the first 11 months of 06. attrition at my agency has been at 40% – maybe it’s 30% overall?
less the referrals in the two years since that statement….
they did 6,200 NSN adoptions in 2007. that leaves 21,300 of the original 27,500.
how many did they do in 2008? we could guess and say 4,000??? that leaves 17,300.
less 30% attrition is 12,000. for the remainder of 2006. excluding dec 06 – but they have already referred a few months in 2009.
March 1st, 2009 at 9:28 pm
You have to add in the people LID since then. Most estimates have the first few months of 2007 at way more than 10,000 as people tried to get in before the new rules.
March 1st, 2009 at 9:54 pm
Hello
I have been trying to figure out this site for awhile and I am confused so please forgive my ignorance. How do I calculate my time to referral as of right now? I know it can change minute by minute but I need to have an idea at least. My log in date was 2-25-07.
Thank you kindly
March 1st, 2009 at 9:58 pm
sorry, i mean for JUST 2006. is it possible that the 12,000 figure refers to the rest of 2006 LID families?
March 1st, 2009 at 10:00 pm
I already answered that, 7:22 comment.
March 1st, 2009 at 10:06 pm
How do you know who drops out? We have decided not to renew our 600a once our free renewal expires; but how would anyone know that. My point is how do you figure attrition rates; won’t most people just quitely give up? How and why would you notify anyone you were giving up?
March 1st, 2009 at 10:07 pm
With a lid of 2-5-07. We would be years away from getting a referral anyway
March 1st, 2009 at 10:11 pm
We ask people who know how many people started out in their agency’s LID group, and who know how many remain currently, to submit that information in a survey.
You are correct that we can’t ask people who have dropped out to report in, as they are likely not hanging around in large number anymore.
March 2nd, 2009 at 3:36 am
“RumorQueen Says:
March 1st, 2009 at 2:29 pm
But, it won’t work. The US does not keep track of how many US dossiers are sitting in the CCAA’s holding rooms. ”
We missunderstood echothersn, RQ, or may be my explanations were kind of blury.
I am not saying we should talk to US, or Canadian or French governments (even though France is a ’smal’ country, its governement does not bother with this type of info either).
No no no, all I am suggesting is that we should talk to our agencies to GET THE RIGHT FIGURES instead of guessing. I can not believe US agencies would not be aware of the number of files still in line. So…
The thing would be to pick up our phones (one responsible per country listed on my above comment) and ask the question to our agencies or NGO (in our small country, NGO helps us to adopt internationaly, exactly the same way your agencies do, but not for the same fees as they are NGO).
Does this make sense?
Best regards
Marianne, from France
March 2nd, 2009 at 8:15 am
French Marianne – as others have pointed out, there is no way that 80% of the US agencies will give out that kind of information. And in some countries there are no agencies, only the government, and those government agencies are certainly not going to share.
Some agencies won’t even tell people who are logged in, how many people were logged in with them. And of those that gave out that information, there are some who won’t tell families how many are left in that LID group. They treat it like it’s some huge state secret. You think those agencies are going to give up how many NSN families they currently have waiting? No way. We have enough agencies who give out the beginning LID number vs current LID number that we can get an attrition percentage. But for the number you are looking for, a total number left waiting, you’d have to have something approaching 100% compliance for the number to do any good. And I doubt we’d have 15% compliance.
March 2nd, 2009 at 10:26 am
I’ve never perceived the “backlog” to be defined as everyone waiting. If all of those files were to be cleared, there would be no one waiting in line and that would never be the case, right? Or am I missing something? I think they CCAA defines the backlog as those dossiers that could be cleared thereby leaving enough people in line, who would at that point, wait a reasonable amount of time — maybe 18-24 months (that’s totally a subjective number). So maybe the 12,000 dossiers represents that specific group. Just a thought.
March 4th, 2009 at 9:41 am
New here, so first off, RQ – Thank you for everything you do!
Maybe this has been mentioned, but my first thought about the backlog is that it represented the amount of dossiers waiting to get thru the review room. Any takers on that theory????
Jim LID 06-13-07