Update on KCMO's new "performance standards"

On Wednesday, I posted about a new "Performance Standard" that Kansas City, MO  is implementing that is requiring animal control officers write at least 15 citations each month and intake 20 animals.

When, Kansas City Dog Advocates sent out the notice on this to their members, I expected it to cause some waves, but I didn't expect the feedback we've gotten.

News of this has spread throughout the city, and around the country. We've been contacted by national and local organizations (I plan to post some of the feedback sometime next week). So far, the only people that think this is a good idea have been city administrators. Apparently none of them are all that great at math.

The media has also picked up on the story (we never even got a chance to do a press release). First, a reporter from The Pitch (our weekly alternative paper) picked it up and put it on the Pitch Blog (PLOG). On Thursday, I did an interview with KSHB news (SweetP and Grommit were the stars of the interview), and on Friday, MichelleD and a representative from the Pet Connection met with Fox4 for their story.

TV news isn't exactly the best delivery vehicle for actual statistical analysis, so KCDA has a reaction to most of the city administrator's comments on their site.  A lot of their comments have made me chuckle with political doublespeak  like:

"It's not a quota, it's a performance standard".  Um. OK.

"The policy isn't new....it just hasn't been enforced."  Um, yeah.

But the biggest thing to me is the blatant misuse of statistics to try to mislead the public. 

In the interview, Mike Schumacher, who handles many of the policy decisions for animal control, said that the new "performance standards" won't increase the number of animals brought into the shelter. According to Schumacher, the new standards require each of the 18 animal control officers to bring in (a minimum of) 20 animals per month (360 total animals).  He says in the Month of July, Animal Control responded to 1100 animal control calls, and there were 800 total impounds -- which is well above their stated minimums.

All of that information is technically true, but doesn't tell the whole story.

First off, every animal control call should not require an animal to be impounded. Many times they'll respond to barking dog calls, neussence calls, calls about a dog without a dog house, a stray dog that is gone by the time they get there, etc. So 1100 calls is essentially meaningless as most of them shouldn't require a dog to be impounded.

Meanwhile, of the 800 or so impounds in July, nearly 300 of those impounds were made by the public. These consist of owner surrenders to the shelter, returned adoptions to the shelter, and strays that are found by the public and taken to the shelter.  Of those impounds, only 506 of them were made by actual animal control officers.

That's still over the new "Performance standard", so that's not a problem, right?

Still wrong.

Animal control is a seasonal business...and summer is their busiest time. So let's look at the monthly animal control intake over the past 7 months:

July: 506

June: 509

May: 402

April: 383

March 396

February: 311

January: 295

So, if animal control officers are required to bring in 360 animals per month (and keep in mind, these are MINIMUMS), where are the animals going to come from in the winter months? And it is ridiculous to say that this new "performance standard" system won't lead to more impounds in January/February when, in order for AC to meet these standards, they HAVE to impound more animals.   And honestly, March/April/May are all way too close to the minimum for my taste also. And the numbers don't even touch on the negative impact the policy will have on sending the message to animal control officers that bringing animals back to the shelter is the most important thing you can do for your job. 

It's just amazing that they are using the year's busiest months as the baseline for the news minimums without any thought (knowledge?) of what it will look like in the winter months.

We can, and must, do better. This is a slaughter waiting to happen. And everyone seems to know it except the people who set the policy.

More to come on this I'm sure. But go check out KCDA's site -- there is more response to the city reaction there, as well as a note sent to the city council by city manager Wayne Cauthen that tries to justify this decision to our city's policy-makers.

Comments

[EmilyS]

someone better clue them in that the essential concept behind performance- based measurement is to produce good OUTCOMES (i.e. better treatment of stray animals) and not just to hike OUTPUTS (i.e. numbers of things you can count).

What they're doing is the classic perverse result of poorly designed performance systems.

[JAL]

To your list of better ways to measure performance from the previous entry, how about

--feral cats trapped, neutered and returned to colonies
--new volunteers recruited from communities to assist with TNR and colony maintenance

Imagine, if each of those AC officers recruited or helped get just one new feral cat volunteer up and running in places needed per month, or even every second or third month, and provided assistance taking captured ferals to a clinic in cases where transportation was a barrier.

To that end, providing transport to a few dogs or cats to s/n clinics for those who cannot drive sounds one hell of a lot better to me than having to seek out animals to impound

[Brent Toellner]

JAL,

You're killing me. Yes, that would make great sense. Unfortunately, that's a whole different law we need to deal with. In KCMO, if you feed an animal more than once, that animal becomes an "owned" animal. So someone who feeds a feral cat colony essentially assumes "ownership" of that colony. Then, they become guilty of the city's pet limit laws by "owning" more than the city limit of 4 pets. Not only are they not working with feral cat caretakers like you would suggest, they're actually prosecuting them...

[JAL]

Gah, that's the scenario that makes limit laws and MSN so B-A-D for cats, and anyone who cares about reducing killing.

At some point, ACs decided to work against people and embrace such a negative, punitive attitude. And so hows that been workin?

I know, rhetorical question here!

In Sacramento, we have many of our breed rescue foster homes. Rescue and the breed club have a great relationship, and many of our fosters also have show dogs which of course are intact. Sacramento's animal ordinance is very draconian and expensive to comply with if you have an intact pet, no matter why.

Friends found out, last year, that the line in the sand on the limit law is interpreted VERY literally. They were watching two dogs for a friend for one week. A neighbor turned them in. The ACO told them that the limit on the property was the limit. Additional dogs could not visit, stay or put foot on without violating the law which could mean fines and revocation of fanciers permits or intact licensing. Calls to the AC director have confirmed that this is policy and will be enforced.

So anyone now who picks up a stray, brings home feral kittens or takes in a dog for rescue or from someone in an emergency situation in Sac could be fined and punished if they already have pets in the home. Ditto on the breeders who take lifetime responsibility for dogs or cats and will take them back at anytime in their lives.

This policy means fewer willing to help or get involved, fewer homes, more animals funneled into the shelters and more people opting out and dodging detection by not licensing pets. Another brilliant idea that needs to be done away with but the AC defends with vitriol. Oy.

[KC KS Kills Dogs]

I have never understood how Mike Schumacher could oversee AC in KC?

Not just Schumacher, but no city management have ever been in the field learning from the many volunteers who participate in inner city dog programs, inner city rabies shot clinics, or inner city s/n clinics about effective AC solutions.

And I sure don't recall any KCMO city management attending KC Dog Advocate's Canine Legislation conference a few years back, where they would have had the opportunity to hear the wonderful Bill Bruce of Calgary, Alberta Canada speak about effective AC!!!

[Social Mange]

This is all starting to sound like what you'd hear after falling down the rabbit hole. KC city management obviously has no idea of how to rate employee performance or establish intelligent performance standards, and has absolutely no care for the animals.

KC taxpayers should start asking how ALL city employees are rated on performance, if this asinine example is typical of the thought process throughout the KC bureaucracy.

[KC KS Kills Dogs]

Here's some updates to the new performance measurements - Wednesdays KCMO AC goes out and confiscates any animals that are not licensed or those animals that are at a home over the pet limit.

Also KCMO AC is darting dogs rather than properly using catch poles. You might want to check into Missouri State laws that might be illegal.

So is darting dogs rather than using a catch pole part of the new performance measurements too? When did the field officers become proficient in using the drugs involved in darting a dog?