We Need to Know

LAAS has always been weak on analyses of the reasons for impounds, animal demographics and shelter operations.

May I suggest yet again for the 50th time that Boks hire someone to do analyses of these variables? We have got the know the nature of the problems facing LAAS and based on that, strategies for solutions. This is very simple operations analysis. Hire a consultant for six months to run all the numbers for the last five years, allowing LAAS to build a predictive model of intakes including areas and numbers.

To satisfy the animal welfare/rescue community, the City has to hire Winograd for a shelter analysis. It is not necessary for all shelters, but pick two, maybe the two worst. Have Nathan do the analyses, help select the managers for those two shelters, and shift personnel around best to see if that makes for significant improvement in those two shelters' performance figures.

I am becoming less hopeful that massive structural changes can be made in LAAS or County unless the mayor gets behind the change 100%. This is not going to happen. I fear that unless a management superstar is brought in as a new GM, improvement will be slow and uneven. How to select that superstar? Who will apply?

My solution is to isolate the two worst performing shelters, do an analysis of operations, appoint the best managers in LAAS to run those shelters, shift better personnel to those shelters and see what happens. If marked improvement can be made in a year, there will be substantial support for the idea that real no kill is possible.


Anonymous said...

You realize that there are other more competent agencies to do shelter audits than Winograd. With what is happening, he's just not the best one to consider. There needs to be a subjective audit done and Winograd is incapable of doing that.

Ed Muzika said...

What are these more competent agencies? Waht reason do you have for that statement? Can you provide an example of on eof their reports?

Winograd has posted the preliminary analysis of the Philadelphia consult which is over a hundred pages long, which I find very thorough. I have seen no other agency who has provided or posted the same.

My argument against Winograd is that he attacks everyone including his former claimed successes. I also see a huge number of problems if he comes. But I see no more problems than LAAS is having now.

Besides, a very large number of the animal community wants this. If the City and Boks were to allow this, and Winograd promises to play nice and not attack everyone here and just do an analysis and write a report as well as help select shelter directirs, I think it is a win-win.

If Winograd succeeds he will have boasting rights. If he fails, he will blame everyone else, but the animal welfare groups will have seen the City's attempt to comply with their demands as well as demonstrate why Nathan's consults have not worked. This may take the pressure off of both the mayor and Boks to an extent.

If Winograd does not agree to these terms he may be regarded as an empty bag.

Anonymous said...

Politically I don't know if Winograd is viable in Los Angeles, I don't know the whole personality-history.

But I read his analysis of PACCA, which Ed M. posted here, and it seemed very thorough, ranging from signage to personnel deficits and dynamics, hygiene and sanitation issues, hours of operation and more. I'm not saying another agency couldn't have done as thorough a job, but I am saying that it seemed balanced, free of personality issues, objective and comprehensive.

Of course, the other issue is that since Antonio Villaraigosa has made it clear that animal welfare (or anything else in Los Angeles, including the skyrocketing child-homicide rate) cannot keep him from his appointed rounds as Clinton bootlicker, I think our other main goal should be making sure he doesn't get another term, or another governmental job.

Anonymous said...

What my mother taught me:

"The devil you know is no worse than the devil you don't know. "

I'm not getting in line to marry the GM, but who knows if this is true?

Two cents worth.

Anonymous said...

You can be so rude, Ed. HSUS has a quite thorough audit and have many referrals. That is but one that you might know the name of. At least, they have doing it for a long time, with many referrals, unlike your Mr. Winograd. The County of Riverside had their audit online for quite awhile, did you not read it? I'm not sure but it was over 200 pages, if I recall correctly. This was a result of a Grand Jury investigation of the shelter but if you look up other HSUS audits, they stick pretty much to the same template. There are other agencies but I think this one is enough for you.

Anonymous said...

There are a few agencies that do nokill consulting. HSUS, Animal Match are but two. What's funny is Boks used to do nokill consulting. He offered his services to the Mayor, then the Mayor asked him if he wanted to be the GM. A lot of good that consulting would have done if he can't get it nokill directing

Ed Muzika said...

Re HSUS consulting. No, I did not read it. Do you have it or am I just supposed to accept that it existed at one time but has disappeared now?

Can anyone point me to an online shelter consult by HSUS? If not, I am not taking your word for it.

I have a copy of the Winograd analysis posted; where is yours?

He is not "my" Winograd. We do not even talk to each other anymore. Recently, if you have been reading this blog, you will see I have been asking questions about his behaviors. He is not my idol, my Messiah, my long lost buddy.

BUT, he is well accepted by the LA animal community and by ADL. The latter is important because if Winograd is not part of the equation, you can expect ADL opposition to any non-Winogard solution, and the four years of fighting will go on.

Therefore, if you can find even ONE example of such a consult let us all know. I will post to the link and everyone can compare.

Perhaps you are the person who always wants ME to prove that I am wrong rather than lift a finger to shed any light in this area in terms of specific information.

Anonymous said...

I have a copy of the Riverside audit Ed. Will send. Think I have a few other HSUS audits as well.

Brad Jensen
Cypress, CA

Anonymous said...

"The devil you know is no worse than the devil you don't know. "

You should have reminded us of that when everyone was clamoring for Stuckey to be fired and replaced with someone from the humane community.

My mama said be careful what you wish for, "The Monkey's Paw" and all that.

Anonymous said...

I do hope you see fit to accept this link as PROOF of my statement there are other agencies.
http://www.clerkoftheboard.co.riverside.ca.us/ agendas/2004/2004_08_10/16.03.pdf
The Riverside audit is still online. Also there was an audit done in Orange County that may still be available but I'm not going to take my time to look up what I already know. There are others who do the same thing if you are truly interested in knowing them as well. Keep in mind that the Riverside fiasco was brought about only after placing a knowledgeable person on the Grand Jury and this person was able to lead the way for the findings of the Grand Jury. This Grand Jury report was incredible and was reported on by Bonnie Stewart in the Press Enterprise. A picture of a puppy being euthanized was on the front page of the Press Enterprise two days before Xmas and there was the biggest uproar ever in the papers history. They actually added extra pages for the letters they received about the puppy and the report. Bonnie and her photographer were recognized by the Genesis Awards for this bit of reporting. She also had done an expose in Indianapolis that resulted in the resignation of the AC director there as well. Bonnie is now teaching in Virginia or do I need to prove that too??