Mayor's Alliance in NYC Says Boks Fudged the Numbers

An email was sent to the Mayor's Alliance in NYC that exercised some control over AC&C while Boks was there.

I have heard that Boks had people sign a form in NY saying that their pets could be euthanized. It was probably an owner requested euthanasia form so he wouldn't have to count them. I had heard that they would take these animals, kittens and feral cats, to the back to be euthanized instantly.

(Comment: I think that is what Boks planned to do with that new form found in SLA. It was an owner requested euthanasia form in disguise.)

This is the response from Elen Celnik from the NYC Mayor's Alliance who had very different numbers than Boks:

"As you noted yourself, the difference between our data and AC & C charts is related to owner requested euthanasia. AC & C, does not include information related to intake of owner requested euthanasia. AC & C tries not put down a healthy or at times treatable owner request, but they do not count them in their intake.

"Unfortunately owner requested healthy and treatable dogs and cats still get killed if there is no space. Our reporting [The Mayor's Alliance versus Boks' Maddies-supplied numbers] does include owner requested euthanasia. By leaving the number out, it can provide for a loophole to appear like the euth number decreases, while in fact owner requested euth can increase based on policy decisions or ways in which intake is documented. (So much for Chameleon!)

"As to the previous Executive Director, Mr. Boks, we cannot speak for how he arrived at his percentages during his tenure ---- it was never clear. So as to the difference between his claims and the data you have, I can only state that the numbers speak for themselves.

"Using percentages, I have found can be very deceiving. One can say adoptions increased 100% in a a year, but when they were down to nothing that’s really easy to do. I just looked at this report for NYCACC for 2006. It says the Animal Alliance is the author."

This shows that euthanasia was 51% in 2006. Attached is that report. Also attached are charts that NYCACC made. They show a euth rate of 44%. However, the real rate was was 68% in 2003, 66% in 2004 and 60% in 2005.

My comment: Is this how Boks dramatically decreased kitten euthanasia by going directly to the Bump Room and never impounded? Our previous conjecture is that he was refusing kittens. Maybe he was just killing them.


Anonymous said...

Maybe he refused some kittens and did "owner requested euthanasia" on the others. It is against regulations for him to do owner requested euthanasia in LA.

Ed Muzika said...

Generally shelters do not do owner requested because of the Hayden Act and will do so only if they are "irremediably suffering."

That does not stop anyone from doing the latter but not impounding the animal, thus not being included in the impound or euth figures.

The drop in neonate kittens was so extremely dramatic (about half) that he was doing something through policy, such as either refusing impound or taking them immediately to the bump room without impounding, or perhaps something else.

There is no way you can turn around a 60 month prgression like he did otherwise. Take a look at the kitten impound and euth numbers and how many impounded neonates just disappear. Hundreds. They may have ben reclassified as cats and then killed, as cat deaths did not dramatically drop as much as kittens'.