We were talking about shelter reform and many have suggested a Winograd consult followed by his picking top management. Of course you know the Mayor and Mayoral staff will hate this idea.
Certain others with a hate Winograd attitude say anyone but Nathan. One helpful person with an attitude stated others do consults, and I was given the 2004 HSUS consult report for Riverside County by Brad Jensen. The latter if 174 pages long and Nathan's 112
Nathan's was also a 2004 consult I believe..
You read them and judge their relative qualities.
More info on Riverside statistics by Brad Jensen are below. Take a look at these figures, they are important:
Besides the quality of the report, I like Nathan's better for a number of reasons, it seems more to the point and has a directive toward 90% save; HSUS does not.
But the quality of the report is not enough. There are areas in which I think both fail: how to implement; hour much additional time and budget is required to do all this; best use of volunteers to help staff; manpower analysis; how to get difficult employees out.
However, we can measure the perfomance of these two systems two years after the consults. How much impact the consults had on the current perfomance, I don't know. No one does.
Remember, Philly went from a Nathan speculation that Philly was an 85-90 kill before his consult and manager placement. For the past 12 months their stated kill rate was 39%. That is more than cutting euthanasia in half in two years.
Lets take a look now at Riverside for 2006 and 2007. The pie chart is supplied by Brad Jensen on sheltertrak.com. The difference is astounding:
CLICK ON ANY CHART TO MAKE IT LARGER
Remember, Philly is 39%, Riverside, 72%; Riverside kills about twice as many.
Who provided the better consult and subsequent management? Nathan, even though he says Philly is not making the progress they should and is backsliding. Even though the operations manager he touts has jumped ship. For Nathan, Philly is now a failure, yet they are doing twice as well as Riverside.
Now, let's take LA Animal Services under Boks. We know for sure his 2006 stats are not credible because he was refusing kittens and ferals. The first year he started, as I remember, his kill aret for cats was way over 60%, and I don't have a 2006 pie chart but look, for 2007 through January 2008:
Two years after Ed,there has been--at best--a 12% reduction vs. a 55% reduction for Nathan's Philly.In addition, the HSUS consult does not really emphasize decreasing the killing as a main point, or decreasing intake. I can't find it now, but somewhere the HSUS calculated a 2003-2004 impound number as 28,000. As you can see it was well over 31,o00 in 2006 and has increased to about 33,000 in 2006-07.
Therefore, whatever happened after the 2005 HSUS consult has led to increased impounds and killing in 2007, while Nathan's consult led to over a 55% reduction of killing.
Boks had an 11% reduction. What does this tell you?
However both consults were weak on implementation, budgeting and manpower. There was no analysis to how many hours it took to do much what was being done vs. how many how and organization and structural change it would take to implement Nathan's or the HSUS recommendations. This is a HUGE omission by both.