Animal Welfare Professionals

 View Only
Expand all | Collapse all

Asking the field: one change you would make, one program you would add

  • 1.  Asking the field: one change you would make, one program you would add

    Posted 20 days ago

    Two questions for the forum. I am building this network and I want to make sure I am building it around what shelters and rescues actually need, not what I think they need.

    First question. If you could change one thing at your shelter or facility, what would it be? Procedure, policy, equipment, building, software, staffing model, anything. The thing that drives you up the wall every day.

    Second question. If money was not an object and you could add one program, what would it be? Not the thing you are stretched thin trying to do. The thing you wish existed but cannot fund.

    I will read every answer. I just want to know what the field is actually saying.


    #AccesstoCare
    #AdoptionsandAdoptionPrograms
    #CaseManagement*
    #CommunityPartnerships*
    #EducationandTraining
    #FosterPrograms
    #FundraisingandDevelopment
    #OrganizationalManagement
    #PetSupportServices*
    #Rehoming

    ------------------------------
    Join The Shift To Prevention.

    BJ Adkins
    Founder/Director
    Animal-Angels Foundation
    Pinson, AL
    calendy.com/animal-angels
    bjadkins@animal-angels.org
    animal-angelsfoundation.org
    ------------------------------


  • 2.  RE: Asking the field: one change you would make, one program you would add

    Posted 19 days ago

    Something that I notice, and I know that this happens in several other professions as well, is that there is a lack of understand, awareness, and empathy between departments.  I may be a little biased in this, but particularly it seems that staff that feed and clean the kennels are often treated as the bottom of the totem pole, the least knowledgeable, and the ones that everything falls on when things need to get done. Not a single rescue or shelter would be able to operate without the kennel staff, and there is no good option to reduce work load when staffing is low, medical can choose how many surgeries or vaccine updates they do in a day, adoptions can close the line early, but you can't not feed and clean every animal's kennel even if you only have 3 people working that day. One thing I would change is having every staff member shadow a few of the departments but especially kennel staff, so that there can be a mutual understanding of what it takes to keep the shelter operational and it would improve communication and relationships knowing what you could offer to each other to help when you need it the most.

    If I had an infinite budget I would greatly expand cat behavior. Our shelter is already better off than many with the cat behavior that we do now, but it is so much smaller and less developed than our dog behavior programs.



    ------------------------------
    Laurel Wilton
    Feline Welfare Supervisor
    Nebraska Humane Society
    ------------------------------



  • 3.  RE: Asking the field: one change you would make, one program you would add

    Posted 19 days ago

    Laurel, the kennel-staff point lands hard. The people who feed and clean see things the rest of the building does not. They watch which dog refuses food after a returned adoption. They notice the cat that came in six months ago, went home, and is back with a new behavior note. That is surrender-driver intelligence sitting in the hands of the staff too often treated as the least informed.

    What you described, every staff member shadowing other departments, is the same principle that holds prevention work together at the network level. Inside one shelter, between departments. Across organizations, between partners. The same shared situational picture problem. When the building does not have it, capacity and morale crater. When the network does not have it, families call five orgs before they find help and most of them give up before they do.

    On the cat behavior side, the field has a real gap and the funding does not match the dog programs. If it is useful, Dr. Rachel Geller runs a video library on litter box and behavior issues that shelters can access on-demand, and Stacy LeBaron at Community Cats Central organizes Dr. Geller's workshops plus community cat trainings through Maddie's Fund. Both are free, real, and have been useful to us on Pet Help Desk cat calls.

    Happy to share what we have if helpful: calendly.com/animal-angels.



    ------------------------------
    Join The Shift To Prevention.

    BJ Adkins
    Founder/Director
    Animal-Angels Foundation
    Pinson, AL
    calendy.com/animal-angels
    bjadkins@animal-angels.org
    animal-angelsfoundation.org
    ------------------------------



  • 4.  RE: Asking the field: one change you would make, one program you would add

    Posted 19 days ago

    Oh I am very familiar with to resources, I've gone through nearly every training and resource I can get my hands on both free and paid for courses. I try to share as many resources as I can here as well so other people can have easier access to feline behavior and enrichment protocols and programs that I have found successful and fairly easy to implement. I'm actually working on becoming credentialed in shelter cat behavior through the IAABC so that I can help even more people and shelters!



    ------------------------------
    Laurel Wilton
    Feline Welfare Supervisor
    Nebraska Humane Society
    ------------------------------



  • 5.  RE: Asking the field: one change you would make, one program you would add

    This message was posted by a user wishing to remain anonymous
    Posted 19 days ago
    This message was posted by a user wishing to remain anonymous

    Many years ago, an Executive Director said to me: "90% of your job will end up being working around the ego of your vets." She has not been wrong! I have watched and commiserated about veterinarians crossing a lot of really problematic professional boundaries, and because of the never-ending veterinary shortage and our slavish dependency on a DEA license, we are stuck simply enduring it. I cheer on efforts to open up areas of veterinary medicine: things that have already opened up (e.g. euthanasia training for licensed professionals), and hope for many more (administering all vaccines, including Rabies, without a veterinarian).  I also hope that the move towards graduating more veterinarians with shelter medicine experience will help. 

    As for the thing I cannot fund, I think our industry needs to completely overhaul how we house dogs. With our long lengths-of-stay, I think we need to be focused on co-housing dogs in environments that look less like kennels and more like small doggie apartments. 

    -------------------------------------------



  • 6.  RE: Asking the field: one change you would make, one program you would add

    Posted 19 days ago

    The vet bottleneck observation is brutal and accurate. The DEA license dependency means the vet holds all the cards in every conversation, and the shelter cannot solve that alone. Five years ago "we need more vets" felt like a solvable supply problem. Now with the projected 15,000 vet shortage by 2030 in the AVMA and Mars Veterinary Health forecasts, it is structural.

    On the things-already-opened front, the lay euthanasia certification programs in Maine and a handful of other states are real progress. RAVS-style community vaccination clinics with techs running rabies under remote-supervision protocols is the next frontier and it should not be controversial in counties where there is no vet within a hundred miles. Dr. Delores Gockowski at North Ridge Veterinary in Minnesota laid out the same gap on a thread here a few months back. The rural shelter desert and the vet desert are the same desert.

    On dog housing, the long-LOS and kennel-deterioration loop is one of the strongest cases I have seen for foster-first models and co-housing redesigns. Maddie's Fund research on 172 dogs found less behavioral deterioration in the first week when dogs were in playgroups versus solo kennels. Chicago ACC data has playgroup dogs adopting 20 days faster. Austin Pets Alive and KC Pet Project have moved length-of-stay down meaningfully by getting animals out of the building and into homes.

    Our angle on this is upstream. If the dog never enters the shelter in the first place, the housing problem gets 80 percent smaller. For the dogs already in care, the apartment-style model you described is exactly where the field needs to push. The kennel has been overdue for an overhaul for a decade.

    Happy to compare notes: calendly.com/animal-angels.



    ------------------------------
    Join The Shift To Prevention.

    BJ Adkins
    Founder/Director
    Animal-Angels Foundation
    Pinson, AL
    calendy.com/animal-angels
    bjadkins@animal-angels.org
    animal-angelsfoundation.org
    ------------------------------



  • 7.  RE: Asking the field: one change you would make, one program you would add

    Posted 18 days ago

    Hi BJ,

    As someone working through an accredited online veterinary technician program to become certified, your response also highlights the certified technician shortage as well.  For vaccine clinics without a veterinarian physically present on site,  any technicians doing this would need to be currently certified/licensed at minimum.  Licensed technicians administering rabies vaccines would really be a hurdle, but definitely worth thinking about.

    From the vet tech side,  this touches on the relentless ongoing issues around tech shortages, living wages, on the job training,  utilization, title protection,  etc.

    I worked as an "unlicensed" technician for years back before online certification programs were up and running, and had they been available, I would have enrolled in one and become licensed.  

    Now,  almost 20 years later and stepping back into the field, even with accredited online programs to supplement the sparse brick and mortar tech schools,  the same technicians problems exist and conflict continues around wages, shortages, title protection, etc.  

    You are exactly right -it is structural.  The issue of expanding technicians roles where it makes sense in shelter medicine to meet those needs would be a win-win for everyone.  It's hard to see that happening with any kind of broad and practical application when the most basic veterinary technician issues remain contentious and fragmented and vary so much by state and region, as well as among techs, assistants and veterinarians, governing bodies, etc.  It's also hard to see the issue becoming not about serving and providing access to care where it's desperately needed and where veterinarians themselves cannot practically physically go -and more about how licensed techs being able to administer vaccines under remote supervision becomes a contentious issue where there are not a lack of veterinarians (even if affordable access to those same vets still is lacking).

    There is not currently a technician specialty in shelter medicine, as is the case for so many other fields, which makes it much harder to shape the debate, should it ever reach that level, and have technicians with shelter expertise define a clear and unified position about it the role of licensed technicians in shelter medicine and what it should encompass, and how it might be expanded, etc.

     I'm now inspired to become much more engaged and better informed on this.

    .Sincerely,

    Audrey

    Homeward Bound Pets Spay and Neuter Clinic

    McMinnville, OR



    ------------------------------
    Audrey Summers
    Volunteer
    Homeward Bound
    OR
    ------------------------------



  • 8.  RE: Asking the field: one change you would make, one program you would add

    Posted 9 days ago

    Audrey, this is exactly the kind of response I was hoping the thread would pull out, because you are living the thing I can only see from the outside.

    You named the two hard edges better than I did. First, the on-site licensing reality: a vaccine clinic without a vet physically present still needs a currently licensed tech, and rabies is the line where that gets really hard. I am running into it right now building a rural wellness clinic in a county where the barrier was never willingness, it was that there is nobody to physically go. Second, and this is the one that stuck with me, you are right that there is no technician specialty in shelter medicine. That absence is why the debate has no unified voice. When the people who do the work cannot point to a recognized credential and a defined scope, somebody else gets to define it for them, usually from the places that already have vets and the least need.

    That last part is the trap. The moment expanded tech roles get framed as a turf question in well-served areas instead of an access question in the places vets cannot practically reach, the families who actually need care lose an argument they were never part of. Keeping it on access, on serving where care is desperately needed, is the only framing that holds.

    You said you are inspired to get more engaged and better informed. Do it. The field needs techs with shelter expertise shaping this before it ever reaches the level where it gets decided, because if a recognized shelter-medicine specialty and a clear scope for licensed techs already existed, half this fight would be settled. I would like to stay in this conversation as you dig in. If you ever want to compare notes, my calendar is at calendly.com/animal-angels.



    ------------------------------
    Join The Shift To Prevention.

    BJ Adkins
    Founder/Director
    Animal-Angels Foundation
    Pinson, AL
    calendy.com/animal-angels
    bjadkins@animal-angels.org
    animal-angelsfoundation.org
    ------------------------------



  • 9.  RE: Asking the field: one change you would make, one program you would add

    Posted 18 days ago

    If I could change one thing, it would be the "cat tax". Feline practitioners always tell me that there are gaps in research and consequently treatments for cat ailments. There's always a focus on dogs and their needs, and cats are put on the back burner. 

    If money wasn't an object, I would want to open a sanctuary for disabled or otherwise compromised feral cats. 



    ------------------------------
    Kallie Laity
    Owner
    Kitty Kisses Rescue of Reno
    NV
    ------------------------------



  • 10.  RE: Asking the field: one change you would make, one program you would add

    Posted 12 days ago

    I agree with you so much on this. I hope you can open a sanctuary for them someday.

    Audrey



    ------------------------------
    Audrey Summers
    Volunteer
    Homeward Bound
    OR
    ------------------------------



  • 11.  RE: Asking the field: one change you would make, one program you would add

    Posted 9 days ago

    Kallie, the cat tax is real, and you can read it straight off the outcomes. In the rural county I am working right now, dogs leave the shelter alive about 87 percent of the time. Cats, 55 percent for the year, and in the worst month it fell to a third. Same shelter, same staff, same year. That gap is not an accident. It is what happens when the research, the funding, and the attention all point at dogs and cats get whatever is left. You feel it as a treatment gap at the practitioner level. I see it as a body count at the shelter level. Same problem, opposite ends of the same pipe.

    The sanctuary you would build exists because the upstream system failed those cats first. Disabled and compromised feral cats are downstream of no TNR, no low-cost spay/neuter, and nobody watching the colonies before they suffer. I would love to see you build it. I would love it more if we could shrink the number of cats who ever need it. Both can be true at once.

    If you ever want to compare notes on the cat side of prevention, I am at calendly.com/animal-angels. Reno is a long way from Alabama, but this problem does not change much by zip code.

    Audrey, good to see you in this one too. You and Kallie are pointing at the same gap from two ends, the treatment side and the outcome side. Keep pulling on it.



    ------------------------------
    Join The Shift To Prevention.

    BJ Adkins
    Founder/Director
    Animal-Angels Foundation
    Pinson, AL
    calendy.com/animal-angels
    bjadkins@animal-angels.org
    animal-angelsfoundation.org
    ------------------------------



  • 12.  RE: Asking the field: one change you would make, one program you would add

    Posted 12 days ago

    My husband and I have a very small dog sanctuary, since it's just us we get to make all the decisions and I wouldn't change anything there.  I volunteer at a couple different animal shelters as well, but don't feel I have quite enough insight into decisions to be able to make a specific recommendation.  I do hear from staff though that pay is quite low and increasing pay for kennel staff would be beneficial.

    As far as a program though - what I see most often are dogs either (1) lingering in the shelters because they need to be an only dog or (2) behavioral euthanasia for dog aggression.  I obviously never would want a dog in an unsafe situation or to have very low quality of life and in no way question shelters or staff who have made this decision.

    I don't think it will be easy or one single answer, but I do think there is a way to provide private, safe areas for at least some of these dogs.  Adding to the challenge is that I'm in Ohio and they just passed Avery's Law increasing the liability on anyone (including shelters) who has a dog deemed aggressive.  I think liability insurance would be one of the main barriers as well as of course the physical space required as well and time to ensure quality of life for these dogs.



    ------------------------------
    Rachel McCarley
    Co-Founder
    R & R Animal Sanctuary
    OH
    ------------------------------



  • 13.  RE: Asking the field: one change you would make, one program you would add

    Posted 9 days ago

    Reply to Rachel:

    Rachel, the humility in your post is exactly why your read is worth listening to. You are not guessing from a desk, you are seeing it from inside the kennels.

    On pay, you are naming the same structural thing a few people in this thread keep circling. The field pours money into crisis response and then underpays the people who carry it. Kennel staff do some of the hardest, most emotional work in animal welfare for some of the lowest wages in it. That is not a budgeting oversight, it is what downstream-heavy funding produces.

    On the program, I think you are pointing at two different problems that get lumped together. The only-dog dogs are not behavior cases, they are matching cases. A dog that needs to be the only animal in the home is not unadoptable, it is mismatched, and it lingers because the system markets it by breed and kennel behavior instead of by the home it actually needs. Better matching and an honest profile move those dogs. The dog-aggression cases are harder and more real, and some of those dogs deteriorate in a kennel in ways they would not in a foster decompression setting, which means a share of behavioral euthanasia is partly manufactured by the environment, not the dog. Not all of it. But a share.

    Where you land, private safe space for at least some of them, is right, and the barriers you named are the honest ones. Liability insurance, the kind of thing Avery's Law just made heavier in Ohio, plus physical space and the staff time to give those dogs real quality of life. None of that is cheap and none of it photographs well in a fundraising appeal, which is exactly why it goes unfunded. The dogs who need it most are the ones nobody wants to put on a donation card.

    I do not have a clean answer either. But the more of these dogs you keep from ever entering that spiral, through foster decompression instead of kennel deterioration, and by matching the manageable ones to the right homes early, the smaller the group that needs the hard, expensive safe space at the end. Shrink the funnel and the sanctuary problem gets solvable.

    Good luck with R and R. The fact that you and your husband make every call and would not change a thing tells me you have built something right.



    ------------------------------
    Join The Shift To Prevention.

    BJ Adkins
    Founder/Director
    Animal-Angels Foundation
    Pinson, AL
    calendy.com/animal-angels
    bjadkins@animal-angels.org
    animal-angelsfoundation.org
    ------------------------------



  • 14.  RE: Asking the field: one change you would make, one program you would add

    Posted 11 days ago

    If I could add anything, it would be a free or low cost vaccine program for low income families. We are in a very poor county in east Tn. Our county shelter's surrender rate is higher than their stray pick up rate. The second most common reason is affordability. We already have a pet food pantry and a free spay/neuter program but vaccine costs are astronomical for some families, particularly the elderly, disabled and low income. It's heartbreaking when an elderly couple or a young family with kids are forced to turn over a long time family pet due to the inability to meet simple veterinary costs. 



    ------------------------------
    Janet Parrott
    President
    Loudon K9 Paws and Tails
    TN
    ------------------------------



  • 15.  RE: Asking the field: one change you would make, one program you would add

    Posted 11 days ago

    I skipped the first question in my last reply. The answer to the first question is that I would expand their surgical room which is used by a local vet for neuters and for regular medical treatments. The neuters and spays are performed in a very small 8x6 room on a small stainless steel table with barely enough room to turn around. Larger dogs don't even fit on the table. After the procedure the animal is placed back in its pen or on the storage room floor to recover. Post surgical infection rates are higher than they should be. 
    Small county shelters are always understaffed and underfunded. 



    ------------------------------
    Janet Parrott
    President
    Loudon K9 Paws and Tails
    TN
    ------------------------------



  • 16.  RE: Asking the field: one change you would make, one program you would add

    Posted 9 days ago

    Janet, you are already running the model most of this thread is only describing. A food pantry and a free spay/neuter program in a poor east Tennessee county is the upstream work, and you are naming the next gap before anyone has to point it out.

    The data point you slipped in is the one that should stop people. Your county shelter's surrender rate is higher than its stray pickup rate, and affordability is the second reason. That is the whole argument. Those are not lost dogs and feral cats, those are family pets being handed over because the family ran out of money, not love. Vaccines are the cruelest version of it, because they are cheap. When an elderly couple loses a dog they have had for years over a vaccine cost, that is the most preventable surrender there is. You already removed the food barrier and the spay/neuter barrier. The vaccine barrier is the same kind of fix, one more line of access, and it keeps those longtime pets exactly where they belong.

    On your surgical room, you described underfunding better than any budget report could. An 8 by 6 space, a table large dogs do not fit on, recovery on a storage room floor, and infection rates that climb because of it. That is not a failure of your staff, it is what happens when a small county shelter is asked to do real surgery on a closet budget. Expanding that room is the right call if the volume is there. The other path some places take is routing surgeries out to a dedicated high-volume clinic so the shelter is not turning a closet into an operating room. Either way, that infection rate is telling you the current setup has hit its ceiling.

    You are doing this work in a hard place with too little, and you are still thinking about the next family you can keep together. I would like to stay in touch as you build the vaccine piece. If you ever want to compare notes on how other places have funded the vaccine side, my door is open at calendly.com/animal-angels.



    ------------------------------
    Join The Shift To Prevention.

    BJ Adkins
    Founder/Director
    Animal-Angels Foundation
    Pinson, AL
    calendy.com/animal-angels
    bjadkins@animal-angels.org
    animal-angelsfoundation.org
    ------------------------------



  • 17.  RE: Asking the field: one change you would make, one program you would add

    Posted 11 days ago

    We need a new state of the art building with an in house veterinarian.

    If I had unlimited funds, I would hire a veterinary team for large spay/neuter events for undeserved counties including free vet visits and medications.



    ------------------------------
    Beverly Paladinetti
    Philanthropy Chair
    Purrfect Peaches Cat Rescue
    Douglasville, GA
    www.purrfectpeaches.org
    ------------------------------



  • 18.  RE: Asking the field: one change you would make, one program you would add

    Posted 9 days ago

    Beverly, your two answers are in tension, and the second one is the stronger bet.

    A new building with an in-house vet is the expensive, fixed answer. It is also the one the families in underserved counties can never reach, because the barrier was never the building, it was the distance and the cost of getting to one. Your other idea, taking a veterinary team out to those counties for large spay/neuter events with free vet visits and medications, is the model that actually meets people where they are. That is the one I would chase, and here is the part worth hearing: it does not need unlimited funds to start. A mobile spay/neuter and wellness event in one underserved county is fundable right now. The unlimited-funds version is just that same event, run more often, in more counties. Start with one and the model proves itself.

    You are coming at this from the cat side, which is the side the field underfunds the worst, so the underserved-county event model matters even more for the animals you serve. Cats get the least access and the least research, and large accessible spay/neuter events are one of the few things that move feline numbers at scale.

    What you described is not a someday dream. It is a pilot waiting for a first county. Purrfect Peaches could run a version of it sooner than you think.



    ------------------------------
    Join The Shift To Prevention.

    BJ Adkins
    Founder/Director
    Animal-Angels Foundation
    Pinson, AL
    calendy.com/animal-angels
    bjadkins@animal-angels.org
    animal-angelsfoundation.org
    ------------------------------



  • 19.  RE: Asking the field: one change you would make, one program you would add

    Posted 9 days ago

    I am very fortunate to work for a wonderful senior dog sanctuary, and I can't think of anything I would change (except maybe the heat in Arizona)! I wish we could help more dogs, but I don't know if it's possible to provide the kind of personalized care we do on a larger scale.

    If money (and time and staff) were no object, it would be great to have a mobile service to go to homes, kind of like a combined social worker/pet care advisor who could link people to services and resources for their pets.



    ------------------------------
    Susan Foster
    Grant Writer
    Rusty's Angels Sanctuary
    AZ
    ------------------------------



  • 20.  RE: Asking the field: one change you would make, one program you would add

    Posted 9 days ago

    Susan, first, I cannot fix the Arizona heat, so you are on your own there.

    Everything else you said, I can meet you on, because the program you described already has a name and we are building it. A mobile, combined social worker and pet care advisor who goes to people and links them to services and resources for their pets is not a fantasy. There is an emerging field called veterinary social work doing exactly that human side, and the connector piece, the navigator who knows every local resource and routes families to the right one, is the core of what we run as a Pet Help Desk. You did not describe a someday wish. You described a discipline that already exists and a model already in motion.

    And it answers the doubt in your first paragraph. You are right that the kind of personalized care a senior dog sanctuary gives does not scale by making the sanctuary bigger. It scales a different way. You do not grow one org to serve everyone, you build the connective layer that links every family to the right local help, so the personalized care happens across a whole network instead of inside one building. That is how you give thousands of families a version of what your sanctuary gives a few dozen dogs. The sanctuary stays small and excellent. The network does the scaling.

    As a grant writer you would see the funding logic in it fast. I would like to show you what we have built. If you want a look, I am at calendly.com/animal-angels.

    Thank you for the work you do for the seniors. They are the ones the rest of the system gives up on first.



    ------------------------------
    Join The Shift To Prevention.

    BJ Adkins
    Founder/Director
    Animal-Angels Foundation
    Pinson, AL
    calendy.com/animal-angels
    bjadkins@animal-angels.org
    animal-angelsfoundation.org
    ------------------------------



  • 21.  RE: Asking the field: one change you would make, one program you would add

    Posted 8 days ago

    If I could change on thing about our shelter, it would be a few of the adoption and foster policies, we have in place. Specifically, I would lower our 21 and up age policy to allowing people 18 and older to adopt. I would also get rid of our required vet and landlord checks. Where we want our pets to go to the best homes possible, having too many barriers gets in the way. This also has the consequence of increasing length of pet stay, decreasing the number of adoptions we could be doing, and decreasing our lifesaving potential as we are not able to intake as many pets in need.

    If money was not an issue, we would LOVE to implement an intake diversion program to prevent animals from entering both our shelter and our local county shelter. This could look like providing pet food to owners in need, money for medical needs they cannot afford on their own, or behavior training to help workout whatever issue is going on in the home. Having this would decrease the stress that both us and our county shelter feel every single day, while supporting the pet lovers in our community. 



    ------------------------------
    Katheryn White
    Adoption Counselor/Grant Writer
    PAWS Shelter of Central Texas
    TX
    ------------------------------



  • 22.  RE: Asking the field: one change you would make, one program you would add

    Posted 8 days ago

    Hi Katheryn,

    Our foundation supports economically disadvantaged families through emergency veterinary care grants and wraparound services to empower economic mobility for owners. Our team specializes in emergency and critical medicine, communicating with owners and the treating hospital every step of the way to advocate on behalf of vulnerable owners and each party involved (treating hospital, social workers, housing providers, etc). 

    In regards to getting rid of certain policies, I do understand the barriers but I can speak on the consequences of not having veterinary and landlord checks. From what I've experienced, a majority of rescues/shelters do not check financials - again with the concern of less animals being adopted, but when the focus is solely on the animals and not the position of the owner, it becomes a loop of the animal being at risk at any given emergency, especially if that animal is leaving the rescue/shelter with a known issue no matter how "small". I have unfortunately received an abundance of applications/cases where recently adopted animals/owners are applying for assistance and already at risk of surrender. We do check financials and a majority of these cases are on extremely low incomes with little to no savings. While every animal deserves a home and not a life in a shelter, it is not proactive to decrease policy on checking the owner's circumstances. 

    I'm always happy to meet or talk further about our programs and how we could be of resource if you were interested! We are currently partnered in Bastrop, Texas and I'm open to expanding our reach and support. Feel free to contact me directly - 

    allabouttheanimalsfoundation@gmail.com



    ------------------------------
    Maria Putnam
    Founder/CEO
    All About the Animals Foundation
    ------------------------------



  • 23.  RE: Asking the field: one change you would make, one program you would add

    Posted 8 days ago

    Maria, this is the most useful pushback in the thread, and you are not wrong, so I want to engage it honestly rather than wave it off.

    What you are describing is real. You see the downstream data almost nobody else in this conversation gets to see, the recently adopted owner already underwater, applying for emergency help with no savings behind them. That is a genuine failure, and it is worth taking seriously.

    But I think you and the research are pointing at two different things that get collapsed into one. There is a difference between knowing an owner's circumstances and using that knowledge to exclude them. The studies that say to drop vet and landlord checks, the ASV standards and the Weiss adoption work, are about exclusion, screening a family out at the door, and they are clear that it does not predict whether the animal gets good care and it does shrink adoptions. What you are describing is not screening to exclude. It is knowing the owner's situation so someone can stand behind them when the emergency comes. Those are not the same act.

    Here is where I land, and it is closer to your position than it looks. The flood of cases you are catching is not proof those adoptions should have been denied. It is proof that the system adopts the animal out and then leaves the owner standing alone with no safety net. The answer is not a tougher gate at adoption. It is a net underneath the home after it: post-adoption support, a number to call before things collapse, emergency help that arrives before the surrender. Your foundation is that net. You are the thing the no-support adoption model fails to provide.

    So keep the conversation, learn the owner's circumstances, that part you are right about. Drop the gate, do not deny the home over income. Build the net, which is the work you already do and the work we build our whole model around.

    That overlap is exactly why I would like to talk. We run a prevention-first model in Central Alabama, Pet Help Desk triage, emergency stabilization, and post-adoption follow-up, and the piece always in short supply is more emergency-vet-grant capacity like yours to route families to. You said you are open to expanding reach. I would like to compare notes. I am at calendly.com/animal-angels.



    ------------------------------
    Join The Shift To Prevention.

    BJ Adkins
    Founder/Director
    Animal-Angels Foundation
    Pinson, AL
    calendy.com/animal-angels
    bjadkins@animal-angels.org
    animal-angelsfoundation.org
    ------------------------------



  • 24.  RE: Asking the field: one change you would make, one program you would add

    Posted 8 days ago

    Hi BJ, 

    I appreciate your response as a whole, as I do get waved off a lot in this space. I worked as a veterinary nurse in ER and ICU for 6 years and also specialized in oncology. After leaving the medical field, I went into finance to learn about the systems that shape access to this care, learn about nonprofit business and understand the financial planning for individuals and families (owners).  I specialize in business planning and real estate. I've ran my finance business now for almost four years - I have seen the challenges within veterinary, animal welfare and on the human economic side. Both those career experiences have put me in an "advantaged" position to run this nonprofit foundation and advocate for both the animals and owners. 

    I do agree on the lack of resources being the primary issue that needs to be focused on rather than excluding adopters due to policy. I also understand there are gaps in communication/understanding between rescue and veterinary medicine. I've experienced it first hand when working in ICU especially. I think there are issues in that itself that create their own barriers in these systems that aren't talked about enough. I am a big believer in compassion and communication - with owners, rescues, hospitals, housing providers, social workers or any other organization facing issues. Missions may differ slightly but the goal is always the same - keep the pets with the families and provide stability. Our goal is always to meet people where they are and leave them better than when we found them. 

    I'd be happy to meet with you and talk further to see how we could work together! I'll find time on your calendar. 



    ------------------------------
    Maria Putnam
    Founder/CEO
    All About the Animals Foundation
    ------------------------------



  • 25.  RE: Asking the field: one change you would make, one program you would add

    Posted 8 days ago

    Katheryn, you are not guessing, you are right, and there is research that backs you to the letter, which matters for you as a grant writer.

    On dropping the vet and landlord checks, that is not just a good instinct, it is the position of the Association of Shelter Veterinarians. Their Standards of Care guidelines say plainly that imposing strict adopter requirements like employment status, landlord checks, home visits, and veterinary references is discriminatory, prolongs length of stay, and prevents future adoptions. That is your own field's standards body, in writing, saying the barriers cost lives. And a 2014 ASPCA study, Weiss et al., compared policy-based adopters to policy-free ones and found no difference in quality of care or in the bond with the pet, with 96 percent still in the home at follow-up. So the fear that drives those checks, that looser screening means worse homes, does not hold up in the data. For an internal case or a grant narrative, those two sources are your ammunition.

    On the diversion program, that is the whole game, and it is exactly the model we run: food, medical help, and behavior support to keep pets out of both your shelter and the county shelter. Two things worth hearing. First, it does not take unlimited money to start. One funded lane, say emergency pet food plus a small medical-assistance fund, is a real diversion program on day one, and you grow from there. Second, the part you said almost in passing, preventing intake into your shelter and the county shelter, is the most important sentence in your post. Diversion works best when the orgs in a community coordinate instead of each catching the same families separately. That coordination is the highest-leverage piece, and almost nobody builds it.

    You are an adoption counselor and a grant writer staring at the exact two levers that move the numbers. I would like to stay in touch as you build this. If you ever want to compare notes on diversion design or the funding case, I am at calendly.com/animal-angels.



    ------------------------------
    Join The Shift To Prevention.

    BJ Adkins
    Founder/Director
    Animal-Angels Foundation
    Pinson, AL
    calendy.com/animal-angels
    bjadkins@animal-angels.org
    animal-angelsfoundation.org
    ------------------------------



  • 26.  RE: Asking the field: one change you would make, one program you would add

    Posted 7 days ago

    I'm sorry - but why would you adopt out a dog only to have it brought back because the landlord did not give consent?  



    ------------------------------
    Bonnie Clark
    President
    TNR Mecosta
    MI
    ------------------------------



  • 27.  RE: Asking the field: one change you would make, one program you would add

    Posted 7 days ago

    I agree with Bonnie 100%

    This issue keeps coming up  "to reduce barriers" but did you think about the dog who needs to come back to the shelter ? 

    The second idea  to reduce the minimum age to 18 from 21. Bad idea. We increased it to 23 and if the adopter lives in his parents home we ask them to ok a dog coming home. Usually when we ask it the adoption process is done.  Parents are not ok with it. 



    ------------------------------
    Tammy Fabian
    Executive Director
    Friends For Life Animal Rescue
    ------------------------------



  • 28.  RE: Asking the field: one change you would make, one program you would add

    Posted 6 days ago

    At our county shelter - they view adoptions as giving the animal the best life - not to just get homes in a hurry to get them out of the kennel..  Anyone living with parents has to have their OK, along with a landlord or any roommates.  We do not want them to have to bring the animal back.



    ------------------------------
    Bonnie Clark
    President
    TNR Mecosta
    MI
    ------------------------------



  • 29.  RE: Asking the field: one change you would make, one program you would add

    Posted 4 days ago

    Bonnie and Tammy, fair challenge, and I do not want to talk past it. We want the same thing, the dog in a home where it can stay. Nobody wants a bounce-back over a lease nobody checked.

    Here is the distinction I should have drawn more clearly the first time. There is a difference between a barrier and a conversation. The ASV standards and the Weiss research are not saying never discuss housing. They are saying do not turn housing into an automatic disqualifier, a required landlord signature, an employment check, a home visit, a vet reference, before a person is even allowed to adopt. That is the part tied to longer stays and lost adoptions. Asking "does your lease allow a sixty-pound dog, and have you confirmed it" is not a barrier. It is good matching. A conversation-based adoption surfaces the housing question, it just does it as a discussion instead of a paperwork gate.

    On the best-life point, Bonnie, I hear it, and the honest finding is the uncomfortable part. The screening does not buy the better home we hope it does. Weiss compared screened adopters to conversation-based ones and found the same quality of care, the same bond, and almost all pets still home at follow-up. So best life is not what the checks deliver. The match and the safety net are.

    Where I would push is on how you prevent the return, because you are right that a foreseeable one is bad for the dog. Two tools beat a blanket rule. First, a real housing conversation at the table, which catches the lease problem without screening out the good adopter who simply rents. Second, and almost nobody builds this, fix the housing barrier instead of declining the adopter over it. A lot of "the landlord said no" is solvable. We help an adopter document the dog for a landlord, and we work the landlord side so pet-inclusive housing exists at all. That turns a disqualification into a problem you solve.

    Tammy, on the household point, I agree with the instinct underneath it. Everyone the dog lives with should be on board, a parent, a roommate, a partner, and you should ask that directly. The piece I would gently separate out is the hard age number, because the real risk you are naming is consent in the home, not the birthday, and you can ask the first without a cutoff that turns away a solid adopter living on their own.

    None of it works without the net underneath. A lifetime-return promise and post-adoption support mean that when a placement does go wrong, and some will, the dog comes back to us, not to a worse outcome. That is what lets you open the front door without gambling with the animal. This is the exact tension worth getting right, and I am glad you pushed on it.



    ------------------------------
    Join The Shift To Prevention.

    BJ Adkins
    Founder/Director
    Animal-Angels Foundation
    Pinson, AL
    calendy.com/animal-angels
    bjadkins@animal-angels.org
    animal-angelsfoundation.org
    ------------------------------