AR-News: BEST FRIENDS IN UTAH 'POO-POOS' HUMANE EDUCATION

[Humane Education Clubs]

This is truly one of the problems we have with humane education today. 
The larger orgs who have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in
''making humane education available to the public'' has no statistics
to prove its validity. That would cost money!! Therefore, showing no
benefits to the programs.  Well, duh!!!!  The response from 21st
Century Animal Resource & Education Services is lower down.

 
Question from Amanda:

We do a lot of different programs that we feel are very important-we
have a voucher program for spay/neuter, obedience classes for anyone
adopting from us, taking pets into nursing homes, and humane ed.
However, we don't know how to measure results to see if these programs
are worth the staff and volunteer time, effort, and energy that goes
into them. I know some things can be intangible and still having an
impact, but that doesn't work for our board when they ask us to prove
these programs are worthwhile. How do you measure your programs to know
if they are actually making a difference and if you should continue
them?

 

Nathan Winograd’s response: 

The primary difference between for profit and non-profit organizations
is not the mission, is not the quality of the people who work in them,
is not a different principle of doing business. It is, quite simply,
accountability. Non-profits, at least many shelters don't seem to
aspire to any. The CEO of a for profit business that failed to meet his
bottom line would not survive, nor would the business. In the
non-profit world, however, very few CEOs feel they need to be
accountable to the public for their mission. They could merely decry
the “sad state of affairs” and continue to ask for money without ever
being required to get results. “Look,” they are fond of saying, “how
many children we visited this year under our humane education program,”
despite an ever increasing body count as the animals continue to be
killed. 

 

So your question is inspiring in that you seek to make the shelter
accountable. To do that, you need to focus on the bottom line, like a
for-profit enterprise would. For me, the bottom line is how many
animals the shelter saves. You should have one primary goal: reducing
the number of animals that are being killed. And to do that, you need
to do two primary things: adopt more animals and lower the number of
animals surrendered to the shelter. 

 

When you are looking at your programs and services, you need to make
sure they have measurable, life-saving results. There is too much to
do, and unless you are flush with cash, too little money (at least at
first!) to spend it on "intangibles." First on the chopping block
should be those programs and services that are merely duplicative. If
there are 20 other obedience classes in your community, why do you need
one of your own? If you are concerned about cost, with every adoption
we do, we give people a list of available classes. We also list them on
our website. In return for the free advertising, many of them offer
discounts if the pet is adopted from the shelter. No cost to us (except
paper), and we don't have to offer the program. I said this earlier,
look for the gaps in the safety net and fill those. 

 

Second, figure out if the programs are paying off in some way. Not all
results have to be direct, but they have to be tangible. For example,
under Avanzino, the San Francisco SPCA had a program to train hearing
dogs for the deaf or hearing impaired. It was a noble program, but I
couldn't see why we should focus on that since there were other groups
like Canine Companions for Independence who were doing the job of
matching service dogs with individuals who needed them. But, alas, I
was young, impetuous, hot-headed, short-sighted and foolish (I am proud
to say that I am no longer any of those things, except the young part.)
I was informed by a wiser man than I, that not only was the hearing dog
program taking dogs out of pounds were they were on death row (and
hence we were saving them), but the revenue brought in was greater than
the cost of the program and the extra was being used to subsidize other
lifesaving programs at the shelter. So while my focus was on reducing
the death rate in San Francisco shelters, we obviously needed money to
do that, and this program--in a small way, directly by saving dogs from
pounds, but in a greater way, indirectly by providing cash--did that.
Direct or indirect, it was tangible. 

 

Going into nursing homes and humane education are nice programs, but I
believe they are people programs. In other words, I am not convinced
they help animals, either directly by saving lives or making people
keep or neuter their pets with any degree of measurability, or
indirectly, by providing needed revenue streams. Unless they are
revenue generating (directly by payment for services offsetting costs,
or bringing in donations), frankly the benefits are too intangible to
have any meaning for an organization struggling with resource
allocation issues for saving lives. In communities nationwide, shelter
employees, often with dogs and cats in tow, enter classroom after
classroom across the nation where overworked teachers needing a break
met them with relief, and wide-eyed school children petted animals
while grinning from ear to ear. 

 

Meanwhile, generations of shelter directors boasted to their
constituents about the number of school children they were reaching
with their humane message and promising that the light at the end of
the tunnel, the mythical place where animals were loved and had
lifetime homes, was as close as the emancipation of these kids. It was,
and remains, a lovely thought.

 

But this effort was never challenged to see if it could actually get
results. In fact, no shelter director—not a single one—could point to
any: Were more animals being sterilized because of these efforts? Were
people keeping their pets longer? Was the death rate at the shelter
declining because of it? Would these children grow up to be more
responsible pet owners? No one had any answers. Despite tight budgets
and cuts in the areas of animal care, shelters continued to send
legions of staff members into classrooms without any proof that it has
was having or ever hoped to have an impact whatsoever on the death rate
in shelters. Over twenty years of humane education has yet to produce a
single study showing it has made any bit of difference. I am, in short,
no fan of this program. 

 

Finally, break down your programs and services into: short-term impact,
medium-term impact, and long-term impact. Your primary focus should be
on saving the most animals today. So the bulk of your resource
allocation should be to those: adoption, foster, TNR, pre-release
sterilization, etc. A good chunk on reducing numbers over time:
spay/neuter for low-income pet owners (you are not simply going to
adopt your way to No Kill). And finally, over the long-term: building
an endowment for the future and more spay/neuter. Some people say
Humane Ed falls into the latter, but I haven't seen the results. And
when it comes to saving lives, accountability is this key. If, when all
is said and done, all you have are platitudes: "children are our
future," "we must educate future generations to be responsible pet
owners," you'll be spinning your wheels forever. In short, show me the
money.

 

==================================================================

Dear Mr. Winograd,
In regards to Humane Education possibly having little or no results to
the children and other students in it's audience, I would be inclined
to agree with all you've said here. Absolutely not a single study
available showing any results in humane education by any of the larger
national groups who send magazines and publications into thousands of
classrooms across the nation for a period of 10 years.   They are
forced to involve themselves in this to satisfy those who donate.  I
know a lot of professional humane educators at the large national
groups and NOT ONE OF THEM GOES INTO THE SCHOOLS, nor do they have
employees who do.  They have never really done a study nor asked a
teacher how much of the info has been provided to any given set of
students nor tried to follow up with the students themselves.
Additionally,  the programs the larger national groups tend to give are
so sugar coated, in order not to offend anyone (they gotta keep those
supporters happy so they give more money you know) it does indeed paint
a picture of 'no emergency, but someday a fairytale picture
On the other side of the picture, for those of us who are  individual
or smaller grass roots programs and efforts who actually see what kids
can learn and the changes they make right in front of our very eyes
with a hard-hitting program that lays out all the facts clearly at the
onset of the program and then keep their attention with stories of how
they can make a difference,  we know differently.  WE KNOW THAT A
SUBSTANTIAL, fact based and blunt program with no sugar coating CAN AND
DOES have an effect on the students that could literally change the
world within a 20 year time period.  THEY KNOW NOTHING.  Even the staff
and teachers step up and tell us that they were unaware of most of our
facts and info provided.  The question and answer period (usually an
after school addition to the original presentation) brings a flurry of
well thought out questions by kids 5th - 12th grade who would normally
much rather be out playing, but have decided to come back for more
info.

I've been in 9 western states recently speaking to over 5,000 students
and helping them form humane education clubs to older students and I
have been in direct contact with these students.  Of course I cannot
afford to do a professional study or survey and am actively trying to
help 68 volunteers around the nation become active humane educators
with the program I've developed with a new Yahoo group
CREATIVEHUMANEEDUCATION at YAHOOGROUPS.COM   My program is active in 11
states and 5 foreign countries.

I would be absolutely thrilled for you to come and watch one of my
programs so you could see for yourself that a good strong program given
by someone who    still has faith in the human species can,  and really
does make an enormous difference that very minute. For a short
condensed version of my lesson presentation, see
www.21stcenturycares.org/spayn.htm   The site has nearly 300 pages of
information that shows why the program is necessary and how to help
local folks gain the confidence and information needed to get into
their local schools and give humane ed to their students as well.  The
main humane education section is at
www.21stcenturycares.org/he/humaneed.htm 

After all, rescue is only working on yesterday's problems.  WORTHWHILE,
YES.  But, if we forget about our future, we will only assure our
children and grandchildren that they too will be forced to face the
same problems because we were too egotistical, full of agendas and
ignorant to see the whole picture.  See the sad, embarassing story  we
will have to tell our children  www.21stcenturycares.org/storybook.htm 


Why would we trust the large groups anyway? It does NOT take money to
change the future. It only takes knowledge.  New ideas brings new
results.

Remember just like our religious fanatics and minority leaders, absent
crimes and imaginary situations against their people and teachings,
these organizations disappear -- this means jobs. If the HSUS really
solved one of these problems, they would have to lay off a large
portion of their employees.

Is the American public is too damn stupid to recognize that?

FACT: Since 1983, Americans have spent $1 billion annually on community
animal control efforts. 
FACT: Since 1983 Americans have also donated approximately $1 billion
annually to their favorite animal protection organizations.
FACT: With more than 3,000 non profit organizations in the United
States dedicated to this cause and the countless millions of man hours
put into this effort in addition to the incredible figures of $40
billion since 1983 have not lead to one single solution. We still see
dog pounds in every community across the nation scrambling to make room
for the increasing numbers of dogs and cats.

"This is not rocket science - we just need folks to recognize change is
necessary. We put a man on the moon; we can cure a new disease in
record time; we even win wars in 100 days or less. Americans have the
sophisticated technology and successful marketing prowess to make
miraculous changes in the human race, on a global scale, yet, we can’t
seem to successfully convey the reality of our behavior and the
subsequent consequences when it comes to how we view and care for our
companion animals

People could work smart instead of hard.  That would be the single
greatest step this movement could take to see improvements. 
Improvements that have been brought to the public's eye by the national
groups,  but in diluted form.

Tell Amanda to rediscover her program.  have an outsider tell her if
it's strong and entertaining enough.  
then tell her darn board to get off their butts and attend one of the
HE programs and see for themselves.  If she is using a weak and
sickeningly sweet program it will have no effect.  So, it won't be
measured in the correct column.  Kids today are savvy and mature and
can see if you are s silly bleeding heart sweetsy sweetsy type person.
If you are, you're dead in the water before you start.  And trying to
teach students under 5th grade will have little or no impact to the
larger picture.  They just don't get it.
Again, I will end this with the fact that our world is much better off
with these organizations and their efforts, than it would be without
them.   However, it is now time for them to strive for a much better
report card in the future. Afterall,  'TO WHOM MUCH IS GIVEN, MUCH IS
EXPECTED."

I would love to hear back from you.

I remain respectfully theirs (in reference to all of tomorrow's
decision makers.)

Randy N. Warner

President

21st Century Animal Resource and Education Services (21st Century
CARES)



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway 
http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/