Brad Jensen Challenges Boks:

I remarked a few posts back that Boks has a way of using words very deceptively. (Lies) In his annual report as well as on his blog in the bio section, he claims to be the first shelter director to bring a municipal shelter to no-kill. This would be in Maricopa County, Arizona in 2002.

When I contronted him asking how this was possible when the kill rate was 51% that year, he replied Maricopa Co. had three shelters, and he brought one of them to no-kill.

However, one of those shelters is not a shelter, but an adoption center. I assume it was the adoption center he claims he brought to no-kill status. Well, an adoption center is not a shelter.

Brad Jensen, the statistical genius who has been tracking LAAS intake and disposition numbers has issued a challenge:

"Boks, provide me the animal records for those 3 Arizona shelters prior to and while you were there and we'll see what you achieved. You know how to get hold of me.

PS. Oh and Boks, you still owe me LAAS animal records. I paid you in good faith and you have yet to provide all the information I was told would be sent. Very suspicious."

Brad Jensen

So far--surprise, surprise--Boks has not accepted Jensen's challenge. How on earth an anyone claim to have brought a municipal shelter to no-kill when he killed 29,000 cats and dogs in 2003 out of 57,000 impounded?

As Edward R. Murrow said to McCarthy, "Have you no shame?"


Anonymous said...

Here are the Arizona records. It's in the official audit

Here is the summary
Highlights of this report include the following:
• AC&C’s extensive use of adoption fee discounts may have reduced FY 2003
revenues by an estimated $500,000.
• AC&C accurately reports animal disposition statistics when compared against
information from the department’s internal system.
• Controls over inventory and procurement are weak, contributing to budgetary
overages and increasing the likelihood of loss and waste.

Notice, the reports are accurate compared against the internal system. The internal chameleon system which Boks rewrote

He went over budget, didn't report numbers to the public honestly, had less revenue because he gave animals out at a discount if not free, he did not do mandatory performance reports, adoption went down the last year he was there, euthanasia went up last year he was there, Boks let employees buy supplies with a purchasing card which caused them to be way overbudget,

Anonymous said...

Thank you to whoever provide the link for the Maricopa audit! I didn't have this one.

Page 17 - Disposition Testing Results
This section states, "We did not test the validity of ACC's internal tracking system data as part of this audit." Not only that, there's no mention whether the total numbers reviewed in reports represent one facility or multiple facilities.

Page 18 - Rescue Organization Input
A sore spot with me, Maddies Fund distributes grant funds without a validation process in place. In otherwords, they give out grant money based on whatever total numbers a shelter or agency gives them without any proof those total numbers are accurate.

Think I've said this before, I do not add any credibility to the reporting of total numbers without first reviewing the source data. Hence "the challenge". I expect this of myself as well. Any reports, graphs, charts I publish or distribute are based on source data which I'll continue to make available either online or for the asking. I make mistakes like anyone else so I encourage others to review the source data I've used and confirm the reports I create are reasonably accurate.

Brad Jensen