Well, sorry to post another meme so soon after the last one, but my sister-in-law tagged me and since I am a people pleaser I guess I have to do it.

1)  I think it would be fun to make a shoe.

2)  This kind of freaks me out.

3)  I wish I could dance a whole lot better.

4)  I hated my wedding dress.

holly_mick_wedding_filmgrain (1)

5)  I haven’t been to the dentist in like 10 years.

6)  I like the smell of my old dog’s breath.

7)  I love transgendered people.  I also love drag queens.

Pardon the brief interruption.  On Saturday we went skiing at newly re-opened Mt. Waterman ski area and I wanted to blog about it in case other skiiers like us wanted an opinion about it.

The LA Times did an article about it on February 24 and it includes some photos.  We forgot our camera, so alas, no photos here.

I was really looking forward to seeing what it would be like, for a few reasons.  First, the opportunity to ski so close to home seemed too good to pass up.  I know there other places in Southern California we could go, but as the owners of a very old dog whose bladder is sometimes unreliable, we really have to be careful about how long we stay away from home.  The Waterman website indicates that it’s 55 minutes from downtown L.A. and we figured we could be there and ready to ski within two hours from Santa Monica.  This turned out to be a fairly good estimate, although the trip there at 7am took considerably less time (about an hour and a half) then the traffic-ridden ride home (2+ hours).

Second, when I went to Doc’s Ski Haus to buy skis, everyone there was excited to hear we were going to Waterman.  This made me excited we were going to Waterman.

Third, this was a completely spontaneous, unplanned ski day trip, something we’ve never done before.  It just sounded like a lot of fun.

So, did Waterman live up to our expectations?  Yes and no.  Read the LA Times article for more detailed info, but here were our impressions of the resort (and keep in mind the type of skiiers we are–we love the sport but came to it relatively late in life, and enjoy the atmosphere/apres-ski portion of skiing almost as much as the skiing itself).

I’ll start with the pros:

1)  The staff there is really nice.  You get the feeling that they care about the mountain and want it to be a success.

2)  Although there were icy bits in the shaded areas, I liked the snow.  It was soft and a bit slushy without being wet.  For me, it was easy to ski in.

3)  Easy access.  The lift is visible from the road.  Just park the car, grab your gear, get your ticket and you’re off.

4)  No crowds, which was good because the lifts are slow (see below).

5)  It is a good place to practice and learn, given how small and (currently) uncrowded it is.

6)  Although very short, I thought the intermediate run(s) were fun.  I also thought Wallbanger (double black diamond) was a fun run, but honestly, it is way beyond my skill level.  It took me a long time to get down and I lost a ski the second time.  But if I was more experienced I would’ve really liked it.

7)  I liked the atmosphere.  It feels friendly and the other skiiers, ski patrol, and staff were helpful (like when I lost my ski, people were shouting advice to my husband, who was in charge of retrieving said ski).

8)  Apres-ski at the beach!

Now the cons:

1)  It is really small.  With only two lifts running, there were a limited amount of runs we could do.  This was further decreased by the fact that we are intermediate-level skiiers and some of Waterman’s better runs are black diamond.  I can do black diamonds, but this was really challenging (mainly because of bumps).  That said, the challenge made me want to continue to improve my skiing!

2)  The runs are short, and the lifts are slow.  We spent a good deal more time on lifts then we did skiing.

3)  Given its size, I thought the lift tickets were too expensive.

Overall, I am very glad we went to Mt. Waterman, because I had a great day.  I’d go back, especially if I just wanted to work on some skills and get some practice in. Just remember that it is very small and a bit limited.  I look forward to visiting when the third lift is operating and I am a better skiier so I can see what some of those other black runs are like.

I think I may have written a post awhile back with this exact same title.  I’m too lazy to check.  But this seems to happen to me a few times a year: my house, especially the master bedroom and closets, gets so cluttered that I become immobile.  I don’t mean that it’s so cluttered that I can’t move (although I suppose it’s getting close to that point), I mean that the clutter is overwhelming and I can’t figure out what to do first.  For instance, I got back from Aruba over two weeks ago and my suitcase is still lying open on the floor, filled with clothes–and that’s the “neat” part of the room.

I think some people can work and live in this situation and not be bothered by it.  To some extent, I fall into this category, and my husband certainly does.  Neither of us are “neat freaks” in any sense of the words and tend toward slobbiness (I think I just made up a word).  I suppose it should be encouraging to me that there is actually a point of messiness beyond which I cannot function.  Well, boys and girls, I think I’ve reached it.

The only solution, I think, is to get a very large Hefty bag and just start throwing stuff in.

The point of this post, I guess, is to say that sometimes the creative process is so delicate that the slightest thing can derail it.  I have been completely unmotivated for weeks, and while part of the problem is all the traveling I’ve been doing, a bigger part of the problem is that I’ve simply not been taking care of myself or my environment.  In a way, this post is the beginning of me trying to get back on track.

Add one more thing to my list of creations:  videos.

I haven’t been around much in 2008, mostly because I actually haven’t had as much computer time as usual.  January and February have been filled with unexpected trips:  Squaw Valley, Aruba, and Mammoth.

Not that I’m complaining.  I’m having a blast!

Anyway, I created the video above using Windows Movie Maker, which is a surprisingly good program.  I have only used Adobe Premier Elements to edit videos, but WMM has enough of the same features to make a good basic video.

My sister was born when I was 12.  The first three or so months, she cried a lot.  We found out later there was a reason for it (other than the general brattiness that she retains today) but during those times I remember I’d hold her and dance around the living room, listening and singing this song:

I still love this song and to this day can’t hear it without thinking of those days, dancing around, trying to get my sister to shut up.

It still hasn’t happened.

I was reminded of this video from another blog I read fairly regularly, and there is so much nostalgia packed into 4 1/2 minutes here that I almost can’t stand it:

I’d really love to write something deep and heartfelt, but I find my turkey/wine coma prevents me.  So enjoy, and Merry Christmas.

I guess I’ve been a bad girl lately.  But I have a good excuse!  We were at our Oregon house for the month of November and even though I have internet access there it was kind of a pain to update the blog so I decided to take a hiatus.

All right, so maybe that’s not such a good excuse.  It’s all I’ve got.

Since this blog is all about creating, however, I did (kind of) participate in the ultimate in creating.  My cousin Ashley had a baby on November 9 and asked me to video tape it.  Knowing it would probably be the closest I’d ever get to having a baby of my own, I enthusiastically agreed.

Introducing Madison Ryleigh:

Obviously, I didn’t contribute to the actual creation of this charming creature, however, I did spend a good deal of time editing a video of the birth, adding music and what-not.  It’s lots of fun to make videos–I need to do more and perhaps post one.  I told Mick, “I was born to do this…” ’cause I fancy myself quite a good little film maker.

Speaking of filmmaking, if you require a laugh, jump on over to kateharding.net and take a look at this video:


I have been giggling about it all day long.

I have LOTS more stuff to post, but that will have to wait until tomorrow.

Note from Holly:  In a past life I was a foreign credentials evaluator for a company called the International Education Research Foundation.  I left the field shortly after I got married in 1998 but wrote this article for About.com based on my experience.  The article is about six or seven years old, but the information still holds true.

Many people, both in the U.S. and abroad, have never heard of foreign credential evaluation. During my ten years as an evaluator, I can’t tell you how many times I’d get a blank stare when I told people what I did for a living. My well-practiced response: “I evaluate foreign educational credentials in terms of U.S. educational equivalence for the purpose of immigration, licensing, further education, etc.” Simple and to the point, right? Not exactly.

Despite it being a relatively unusual field to be involved in, the field of foreign credential evaluation is growing rapidly, and it has evolved a great deal over the past thirty years. In the beginning, educational equivalencies in the U.S. were generally determined by counting the number of years a person had studied in a foreign country and then comparing it to the level of education a student would have completed in the same number of years in the U.S. Little consideration was given to the quality of education received or to the fundamental philosophical differences that exist in the educational systems of different countries. Evaluation standards and methodology have become more sophisticated over the years, however, and what was once a fairly black and white field has become colored in shades of gray.

A Brief History
Originally, the task of foreign credential evaluation was left up to the U.S. Department of Education through the Foreign Credential Evaluation Service (FCES). Between 1966-69, however, the FCES was curtailed, and finally terminated in 1970. Unlike many foreign countries, there are no national government standards for assessing foreign educational credentials in the U.S. Since 1970, the evaluation of foreign credentials has largely been done by private credential evaluation services or through the admissions offices of colleges and universities. National guidelines for assessing foreign educational credentials have come primarily from placement recommendations developed by the National Council on the Evaluation of Foreign Educational Credentials (the Council), but this is not a government agency and their recommendations are non-binding. It should be noted, however, that the Council has existed since 1955 and their guidelines generally hold a good deal of weight with many institutions and agencies in the U.S. Individual evaluation agencies, colleges, and universities also develop their own evaluation policies, many of which are at least loosely based upon the guidelines recommended by the Council.

Complications & Confusion
If all of this sounds rather confusing so far, you’re right. Since there is no government agency that oversees the evaluation of foreign credentials in the U.S., not all services operate in the same way. In addition, not all services use the same criteria for evaluating credentials. That is, you might get different educational equivalencies for the same credential, depending upon which credential evaluation service you decide to submit your documents to. Furthermore, many colleges and universities in the United States perform their own credential evaluations, and the criteria for admission to one institution might be vastly different than that of another.

My husband has a bachelor’s degree from a recognized university in the UK, while his business partner completed a Higher National Diploma (HND) program in the UK. Both were recruited to come to the U.S. to work in the computer games industry, and in order to obtain their Visas (H1-B and J-1), both needed a foreign credential evaluation. The same evaluation service completed both evaluations, and both received U.S. bachelor’s degree equivalencies.

This is all well and good, except for two things. The first is that in the UK, the HND is not considered to be at the same level as a bachelor’s degree. If a person who completed an HND wants to transfer to a university level program in the UK, they will generally be admitted to the second year of a bachelor’s degree program at a UK university. Based on this information, is it really proper to equate these two credentials to the same thing in the U.S.?

The second problem is that there really isn’t an academic program in the U.S. that is comparable to the HND. For this reason, evaluators will often interpret it differently, depending upon the policies of the individual office. The credential evaluation service that completed these evaluations equated the HND to a U.S. bachelor’s degree, however, the evaluation service I worked for would have equated it to completion of three years of university level coursework in the U.S. Is one service right and the other wrong? No, not necessarily. Each service took the information available about the HND and interpreted it in a different way, but neither is more correct than the other.

To complicate the situation further, let’s say that my husband’s partner decides he wants to further his education in the U.S., so he applies for a master’s degree program. Don’t forget that he has already worked in the U.S. for almost 10 years as a “bachelor’s degree equivalent,” which should mean that he has, at least on a basic level, fulfilled the requirements for admission into a master’s degree program in the U.S. As part of the application process, the admissions office at the university completes an evaluation of his HND and determines that he does not have the equivalent of a U.S. bachelor’s degree and that he will have to transfer into a U.S. bachelor’s degree program, requiring at least two years of additional requirements (what with general university program requirements and courses specific to the field of study).

This situation is not at all uncommon, and in my career as an evaluator, I had to explain the reasons for it to angry clients more often than I care to remember. Welcome to the world of foreign credential evaluation!

Types/Purposes of Credential Evaluation

Typical reasons for which a foreign credential evaluation is required:

  • H1-B (and other work-related) Visas
  • College/university admission
  • Professional licensing

Each of these situations require different types of evaluations. For example, evaluations required by the – INS for H1-B Visas are relatively simple in that they only require a simple equivalency statement along with some brief information about the institution where studies were completed, qualification of the evaluator, etc.  Evaluations for further education and professional licensing tend to be more complicated, and often require a list of courses completed and grades in addition to the equivalency statement.

The Application Process
While some of the requirements and guidelines for specific evaluation services may differ, the application process is generally very similar from service to service.  You will probably be required to submit some or all of the following:

  • A completed and signed application
  • Photocopies of your official documents (transcripts, degrees, certificates, etc.) in the original language
  • Official English translations of all documents
  • You may sometimes be required to submit your original documents, so be prepared.
  • A personal check, cashier’s check, or money order (the amount will vary depending upon which evaluation service you choose, what type of report you need, etc.)
  • < /ul>

    Once your application and fee is received, the evaluation service will review your paperwork to make sure all required documents are included.  If something is missing, they will contact you by mail or phone.  Your file will not be considered “active” until all required documentation is received to the satisfaction of the evaluation service.

    Turn-Around Time
    The time it takes for your evaluation request to be processed will vary.  Some services take as little as ten working days, while others take twenty days or more to complete an evaluation.  Most evaluation services offer “rush” services which can take as little as 24 hours to complete an evaluation.  You can expect to pay a significant additional fee for rush services, and personal checks may not be accepted as payment for this type of evaluation.

    Even though there is usually an additional fee required for rush service, I recommend you ask for it anyway.  Most services offer 3- 5 day rush services for which the additional fee ranges from $25 to $50.  Paying this additional fee means that your file will be given priority and that there is much less chance that you will miss any deadlines.

    A Word About Altered/Irregular Documents
    Most of the credential evaluation services and other agencies in the United States have been operating for years and have a vast collection of sample credentials, not to mention staffs of experienced evaluators who have seen thousands of educational documents from countries all over the world. Furthermore, as international communication becomes faster and easier through the use of the Internet, email, and facsimile machines, verification of credentials has become increasingly simple. Most evaluators will not hesitate to seek verification on any credential that looks even remotely suspicious. Policies on how to deal with altered and/or irregular documents differ from agency to agency, however, most will cancel your application request with no refund, retain all documents submitted, and report the information to the appropriate authorities.

    Helpful Hints
    The following suggestions are meant to help you have the best possible experience with the evaluation service you choose:

    • Important!  Make sure that you choose a service that is accepted by the agency or institution that is requesting that an evaluation be done.  If you don’t, you might find yourself paying for two evaluations.
    • If you’re given a choice of evaluation services to use, call all of them.  As with most things, comparison “shopping” for your evaluation service can be beneficial.  Ask about prices, turn-around times, and get basic equivalency information.
    • When calling each service, ask to speak to a credentials evaluator who specializes in the country you studied in.  Ask them to give you a general idea of what U.S. equivalency you might expect for the particular degrees you’ve completed.  Keep in mind that they will probably not be very specific, as determining an equivalency without seeing documents is difficult.  However, get as much information as you possibly can.
    • Get the names of everyone you talk to and make notes about the information you get.
    • A few days after you submit your application, call the service to find out if it was received.  At this time, you might also be able to find out which evaluator will be completing your evaluation.  Make sure there is no further documentation/fees required. 
    • Make a note of the date your application (or more specifically, all required information) was received.  Based upon the turn-around time of the specific service, make a note to contact them two or three days past the date you expect to receive the completed evaluation.  For example, if the advertised turn-around time is 20 business days, count 22 or 23 business days on your calendar and make a note of it.  If you don’t receive it by this date, contact the service to find out what the status of your file is. 
    • Know that evaluation services make every effort to ensure accuracy with the reports they complete.  However, when you receive your completed report, review it carefully to make sure all the information is correct.  If it isn’t, contact them immediately–most corrections are made quickly and easily.

    What Happens if You Don’t Agree With the Evaluation
    While customer satisfaction is a number one priority of most evaluation services, there is no guarantee that you will agree with the results of your evaluation.  This might seem unfair, but consider the fact that foreign credential evaluation can be a very subjective process.   You (the applicant) have certain goals that you want to accomplish with the evaluation, and if for whatever reason the evaluation report does not facilitate these goals, it’s natural to assume that you will want retribution (whether that be a refund of fees paid or a change in the evaluation).  However, if an evaluation service issued refunds to every applicant who was disappointed with the results of their evaluation, they would be bankrupt.  This is not because the quality of the work is substandard.  The reasons for dissatisfaction vary, but often it’s because of misunderstandings about the methodology of foreign credential evaluation, unrealistic expectations, or simply a difference of opinion of the level of education. 

    Refunds are rarely given for dissatisfaction.  In cases where a rush fee is paid and the evaluation is not completed on time, a refund may be issued.  However, refunds are almost never given in situations where an applicant does not agree with the results of the evaluation, and most evaluation services clearly state this in their terms and conditions of service.

    If you believe that your evaluation report is in error, all complaints must usually be put into writing.  When writing to the service, be as specific as possible and if necessary, give facts to back up your claims.  Ask questions about anything you find confusing or incorrect, and ask for a detailed explanation in return.  Contact the service within five days of sending your inquiry and ask when you can expect a reply.

    Be prepared:  Evaluations are generally not retracted or changed except in the case of error. However, you have the right to an explanation of evaluation policy and in extreme cases, policies are changed when an applicant challenges a specific issue.

PAWS/LA’s annual fundraiser, Pet Art, is on November 4.  It is such a fun event, and moi is a participating artist.

The work/guest room re-do is well under way and I love it.  It’s amazing how much you can get done when you put your mind to it.  The only thing left to do is some furniture set up and some jewelry supply organizing, so photos will be coming soon.

Last night, we could see the fires in Malibu burning from our balcony:


I’m not much of a baker.  Not because I can’t do it or don’t like to do it, but because having baked goods around the house is a little dangerous for me.  I tend to want to eat them all at one sitting.

Yesterday, however, I hosted a brunch for some friends and took the opportunity to make and bake some of my favorite foods.  I also used it as an excuse to bake something I’ve never tasted but have wanted to for a long time:  red velvet cake.

More specifically, red velvet cupcakes with cream cheese frosting:


This is the recipe I used:

Paula Deen’s Red Velvet Cupcakes

If you’re ever looking for an easy recipe that packs a lot of punch for your effort–these cupcakes might be the answer.  They are seriously decadent and the frosting, my god, the frosting.  I could take a bath in it, it’s so good.

Which brings me back to why I never bake anything.