 |
No More Homeless Pets Forum
August 4, 2003 Working With Others |
Can we talk things through and arrive at a solution? Gregory Castle of No More Homeless Pets in Utah and Jane Hoffman of the Mayor's Alliance for NYC's Animals will offer advice on how to reach out to work with others and negotiate your way through tough challenges you may face in your community.
Introduction from Gregory Castle:
There's nothing to say that you HAVE to form a coalition with other organizations in order to help save animals. You may prefer not to, or there may be few other organizations in your area, or, what organizations there are may not want to work with you!But if you CAN develop a successful working relationship with other people and organizations, it will almost certainly gain better results for the animals.
Be careful also that you're not just making excuses in judging that you can't work with others, or they can't work with you. No one said it is easy! But there are ways around most problems when motivated people use their brains, creativity, imagination and diplomacy to solve them.
No More Homeless Pets in Utah is a coalition of 24 private rescue agencies, 56 municipal animal services agencies, one traditional humane society, and 89 veterinarians -- enough for every kind of problem to have cropped up!
I'd love to share some of the insights we've gained from close to a decade of problem solving.
Introduction from Jane Hoffman:
The Mayor's Alliance for NYC's Animals, Inc., was started about a year ago as a way to bring the shelters and rescue groups of New York City together and start working effectively with the City to find ways to reduce the killing at animal control.While I know many of you out there face challenges in trying to work with some difficult people and varying attitudes, I think I can safely say that the average New Yorker can give anyone a run for their money in difficulty and attitude. But somehow it has worked, so far, partly due to a cooperative attitude from the new administration in City Hall, and partly due to widespread recognition about how high the stakes are. Somehow, it seems to have dawned on everyone at the same time that this really could be the moment for New York to finally get it together to find every "little New Yorker" (as we like to call them) a good home.
Among the things we're working on are organizing several "Adopt a Little New Yorker Today in a Park Near You!" events. These events will be held in a City Park in each borough and will be "hosted" by the NYC Parks Department and one of the local rescue groups or shelters. We're also setting up training sessions for rescue groups focusing on marketing, volunteer recruitment, and, perhaps most significantly, developing an effective working relationship with our animal control facility, the city's Center for Animal Care and Control.
There is at least one crisis per day, but so far we seem to have weathered the storm--and I have not killed anyone yet.
Questions
If a group won't come on board, how long do you try before moving on?
Getting AC on board and trainings for coalition members
Setting a focus with a coalition
Should you start a new 501c3 or work with an existing organization?
Approaching health departments and vets about spay/neuter programs
Changing management's mind in your own organization
How rescue coalitions work with animal control
Can you help animals without working with the local shelter?
Determining policies for a coalition
Using legislative means to help animals
Top three tips on coalition building
Determining the spokesperson for the coalition
Determining who takes the lead in the coalition
How the NY coalition got started
If a group won't come on board, how long do you try before moving on?
Question from Connie:
A group of rescues and shelters in my community has been working together for about six months and are all getting along. The animal control doesn't want to participate mostly because they feel a coalition is competition for resources and that we should all be working to help them since they take in the most animals. We are working to help them, but also want to provide opportunities for other groups too.How long do you try to work to get a group on board before you finally just move on and start doing things without them? Are we supposed to keep trying even if they always say no?
Response from Gregory:
It depends on what you're trying to do!If your objective is to reduce the euthanasia that takes place in the community, then it is essential that you come to some working relationship with the government shelter - that's where the animals are being killed.
Part of the relationship with them should involve taking animals from their euthanasia list, so as to prevent them from being killed. In this sense, they are right and you should be working to help them (actually, you're working to help the animals).
I wouldn't labor excessively to get the shelter to be a major part of your coalition. You don't need very much of them to help the animals a lot. Just that they will let you take the animals they are just about to euthanize. If you were organizing group adoption events, where a number of rescues and shelters get together to adopt animals, it would be nice if the government shelter came there too and adopted some of theirs. But it's not essential. They don't even have to say that they are part of your coalition (as long as they give you animals).
If, on the other hand, all your coalition partners already have plenty of animals from other sources, and are at their limit as to how many they can handle, there is no particular need to get them from the shelter (at the moment). In which case, don't worry about making them a part of your coalition. I would recommend you doing whatever you can to cultivate good relations with them anyway, because hopefully there will come a time when you WILL want to take animals from their shelter. Take any opportunity you can also to let them know that the coalition IS helping them, including saving them and the public money, by rescuing animals they would otherwise have to handle.
Response from Jane:
Congratulations to the rescue groups and shelters in your area, which are working together and getting along... that is huge, as you know...I think success attracts so I would just do your best to be as inclusive as possible and then move ahead... not on... ahead... let your success in helping (or at least your intent to help) all members of your coalition become apparent and concrete and it may help convince your animal control that you can help them best if they join the coalition.
Have coalition-wide adoption events and invite animal control to participate or even "host" at no cost to animal control - let them get some of the limelight, hold coalition training sessions for all the groups and shelters to help you all be better at what you do ("How to Attract, Train and Retain Great Volunteers", "Marketing 101"... we can all use help and advice) and invite animal control to attend.
In New York City, we use the analogy of the battle group of an aircraft carrier... in some ways animal control is the center of the "battle group" since they have the animals we are all trying to help... we envision animal control as the aircraft carrier and the participating organizations of the Alliance are the battleships and cruisers which support the aircraft carrier... we all have to do our part to win this war on pet overpopulation and homelessness... and we need to move forward as a group... sorry for the warlike imagery but it works for us here in NYC...
You have made a great beginning and I would just make a general and open-ended invitation to animal control to join with you all so that you can support their efforts and you can all help the animals.
Getting AC on board and trainings for coalition members
Question from Carrie:
I was interested to know how in Utah you got 58 animal control agencies on board! That is amazing since we can't get even one. How involved are they in the coalition and your programs?And in NY, I liked your idea of holding trainings for the groups on marketing and volunteer recruitment. Have the groups found that useful and are they using any of those skills they learned?
Response from Gregory:
In Utah, some of the agencies are very much more involved than others. Our base requirements are relatively minimal. We require that they report monthly statistics on intake, redemptions, transfers (to private animal welfare groups), their own adoptions, and euthanasias. We required that they give us these numbers for a whole year to start with - to give us a baseline from which to work. In a few cases of very small agencies, they didn't have adequate records to provide these baseline statistics. In these cases we estimated them based on anecdotal information ("We get about four dogs a week, and kill about two of them, but I remember last July and August were big months," etc.)Sometimes shelters are defensive about giving out their numbers, even though they are public record. We have been able to smooth the way in some of these situations by promising not to publish the numbers of any individual shelters - such as the statistics for a county where there are four shelters, or a region of the state.
The second requirement is that the shelters in Utah allow our coalition partners to get animals from them that they would otherwise euthanize. But, even this is not essential if there are plenty of animals available at other shelters.
Our most involved shelters (roughly half the 58) do a lot more than just this. They send dogs and cats to our Super Adoptions, they take animals for adoption to our mall adoption centers, called Furburbia, they post their adoptables on our website, they participate in Home for the Holidays, they work with us on spay/neuter initiatives, they host the Big Fix, our mobile spay/neuter clinic.
We have one person whose whole job is to liaise with the shelters. He gets to know them individually, he goes out for half a day on a ride around with their field officers, he helps them find rescue organizations to take their animals, he oversees their involvement in our adoption events, he talks out their problems with them, he goes to their Association meetings, and he sits down and has a beer with them (yes, in Utah!). This contact does a tremendous amount to cement relations, build trust and confidence.
Response from Jane:
The training sessions have been enthusiastically embraced by the Alliance Participating Organizations... who can argue with free stuff???We have approached choosing topics and "staffing" these training sessions in two ways... going outside for experts and reaching inside the Alliance for "the best and the brightest" for what already works in NYC.
For example, we have been able to prevail upon experts in different fields to share their expertise, expertise that can be applied to the Alliance's mission to increase adoptions. We have had a merchandising display expert (who knew there was such a thing???) come in and explain to groups that how they set up their booths at adoption events mattered, that how they look as a group matters, that the image one conveys to the public can enhance the value of our animals. We know that each and every cat and dog in our care is beyond priceless, but the public may need to be convinced of that and we owe it to our cats and dogs to be as good at this as possible to find them the best homes possible. This week we are doing a training session entitled "Marketing and Public Relations 101" to continue that theme.
The training session in the works entitled "How to Attract, Train and Retain Volunteers" is also very exciting and anxiously anticipated by the Alliance to groups for two reasons: (1) who can't use more volunteers and (2) we are asking the Alliance groups that have (in our humble opinion) the best volunteers programs to share their knowledge with their fellow Alliance members.
I could go on about our adoption event equipment reimbursement program, which is designed to produce a certain "look". The groups were initially a little resistant. But after seeing how the Alliance and each group "looked" at out latest Alliance Adoption and Pet Care Festival in Central Park, they all want to buy more equipment.
Setting a focus with a coalition
Question from Kathy:
How did you get groups on board when you had no success under your belt? We are having a difficult time getting groups to come to the table and talk because in the past, talks have resulted in bad feelings and people yelling at each other.And if you do get them to come, how do you even begin to set a focus? We know we want to reach no more homeless pets, but so many different groups have different focuses and how do we narrow it down to what is most important and what we will cover as a group?
Response from Gregory:
It's easy to fall into the mistake of too much talking and not enough doing. If you had the kind of difficulties you talk about, how about setting up an adoption event and asking other groups and organizations to participate? You don't have to agree on very much - just that you're there to adopt animals.The way we started in Utah was to arrange adoption fairs in local malls. (You could do it in a park or parking lot.) We would make arrangements with the mall, including them providing basic equipment like tables and chairs. We would advertise the event; in some cases the mall would help out by providing a small budget for posters or table tents in the food court. We would get in-studio TV appearances on local news and community affairs shows beforehand, send out press releases and invite the media to come to the event itself. We would invite half a dozen other organizations to join us in the mall, and lay down some very simple ground rules (like come on time and don't leave before the end). Nothing controversial, and we let each organization use its usual adoption procedures, so we didn't get into issues like no outdoor cat adoptions, or dogs having to have a fenced yard.
We usually did about 75 adoptions in a two-day event, which meant that each organization averaged around 10 adoptions each - a result most organizations were pretty happy with.
The point is to give something to your partner organizations - give them the venue, get the adopters there, provide what equipment you can, and let them reap the benefit. If you have groups that don't get on with one another, keep them apart, or don't invite one of them.
Do this for a while (we did it for six years before formally creating a coalition), and you will build trust. People will start appreciating what you are doing to help them get results. People will get used to working together. You will find some of them will call on one another for help when a problem arises. It may happen slowly, but it will happen.
The main thing is you're DOING things together. TALKING about it, and what else you should do jointly, will then come naturally. You will build respect for one another, including maybe one another's differences, and will be able to discuss future plans with positivity - not yelling.
I've discussed this point using adoptions as an example. The same principles apply if your focus is spay/neuter or education. Use your imagination and creativity to start working together fulfilling as many of the needs of your partners as possible.
Response from Jane:
I think starting from zero is not necessarily a bad thing... anything you do to improve the situation will be a success.In NYC, we used Maddie's Fund as a focus for our initial coalition building because of several features that appealed to us... no trash talking in public about other groups, including animal control, and agreeing on a narrow focus. The Alliance mission is to increase spay/neuter surgeries, increase adoptions and reduce the killing of cats and dogs in shelters. Period. That is more than enough to do. We wanted to be as inclusive as possible and groups have many different agendas but all groups agreed that this mission was something they could all agree on so that is what we do. Groups are allowed to continue doing what they do (hopefully doing good adoptions ad promoting spay/neuter) as well as speaking out on issues that are of concern to them. BUT they may not purport to speak on behalf of the Alliance as a whole. That way, we keep the mission and the focus single-minded and don't get bogged down in one group's agenda. I think this can work to get your coalition going whether you ever intend to apply for a Maddie's Fund grant or not.
Also, forums to get all the groups together, which are moderated by a neutral third party, may work for you to hold down the yelling. In NYC we were fortunate to have the Animals and the Law Committee of the NYC Bar Association be involved at the inception of the Alliance, which provided a space and a moderator to control discussions. Disagreement was OK as long as it was civilized. Perhaps you can identify such a forum in your area.
Should you start a new 501(c)(3) or work with an existing organization?
Question from a member:
We've been thinking about stating a local coalition. How do you fund your coalition? Do we need to create a new 501(c)(3) organization? Or could we channel funds though an existing organization?Response from Jane:
In NYC we started a new coalition because the city wanted to speak to one group that could represent all the animal rescue groups and shelters. But you can certainly have the lead agency be an existing organization if you have one that is willing to lead and others are willing to follow!If one chooses to go with a new organization, securing tax exempt status is obviously necessary for fundraising purposes. It also allows you to have a very clear mission for your new organization.
Our coalition is funded the old-fashioned way--by fundraising from all the usual suspects and sources and discovering some new ones, such as people and/or funders that are excited about the prospect of all the rescue groups and shelters collaborating and working together toward a common goal.
Response from Gregory:
If you have a suitable lead organization with 501(c) 3 status, then there's no reason to create a new one, although there may be advantages to doing so. It could give you greater independence, facilitating easier leadership, focus, direction and control. But if all of that is coming from a well-respected existing agency, whose leadership is clear on the direction to take the coalition, and happy with being in the lead role, then that could work very well.In Utah we have been fortunate in having a strong lead agency (Best Friends), which has been able to play a significant part in providing resources (money, people, expertise, etc.) to begin and continue the coalition, and we have been extremely fortunate in being the recipient of substantial grants from Maddie's Fund. We have also focused on securing sponsorship arrangements with commercial companies and pro bono relationships to help finance events, advertising, and programs. And in addition, we appeal for donations as often and in as many varied ways that we can.
Approaching health departments and vets about spay/neuter programs
Question from a member:
When approaching public health departments or vet associations about a program such as TNR or low-cost spay/neuter, do you think it is better to try and get the program up and running first to show success? Or do you think it is better to go to them first with the plan and get their input before starting? The reason I ask is that we have been doing TNR in an "underground" approach for a year now, but want to be able to start a spay/neuter clinic and recruit funding. We'd like to approach our health deptartment for support and our vet association about working with us on a program, but are concerned that if they are not supportive they will try to shut down our efforts completely. We want to be out in the open but are afraid of what might happen.Response from Jane:
I think I would defer on this question to the experts on TNR: Alley Cat Allies in Washington, DC. They have a great deal of experience and some wonderful materials on how best to make your case for TNR. In NYC we have a local group called Neighborhood Cats, which is doing some terrific work. On the Alliance website, look under Links, and you can find a link to Neighborhood Cats.Response from Gregory:
I think you've got two different animals (pardon the expression) in the health department and the vet association, and they'll probably have different reactions to the two programs you're thinking of.To provide you with some sweeping generalizations, the vets won't mind you starting a TNR program, and many will probably work with you willingly, as long as you don't ask them to reduce their charges (or at least not significantly). Vets generally make very little money on spay/neuter, and they can't usually manage to up sell people who are looking for a deal. (Of course, there will be some committed and principled vets who see helping with these problems as part of their contribution to society and the animals, but frankly, most do not.)
On the other program, a spay/neuter clinic, expect a fight from the vets. You're encroaching on their territory, and most just see you as competition. Our experience has been that logical explanations as to why this is not the case don't cut any ice. Talk to them ahead of time, by all means if you wish, but my prediction is that they won't like it.
The health department will support you wholeheartedly on your spay/neuter clinic (if they're interested!), but their reaction to your TNR program will probably depend on a) how local ordinances about pet 'ownership' are written and whether they are enforced; and b) how enlightened specific health officials are. On balance, I'd lean in the direction of carrying on your TNR program, documenting it extremely well, and building a case with good evidence that it works. That way you stand a better chance of enlightening the health department, if they are not already enlightened.
Changing management's mind in your own organization
Question from a member:
I work at a humane society that has the animal control contract for our county. For many years, we were the ONLY group working with animals, but in the last five years our community has seen the formation of new no-kill shelter, an animal rescue group, a feral cat TNR advocacy group, and more are forming even now!We have been very lucky in that most of these groups approached us initially with much hope toward a relationship, rather than competition. However, our management took a very defensive and negative attitude that turned them away. Many became so distant they refused to work with us in any capacity. A few work with us on a "back-door" basis - for instance, employees will slip animals out the "back door" for fostering, or we will secretly make arrangements to support these groups without informing the executive director or board - a sadly easy thing to do.
As the community relations director for the agency, I feel it is my job to form and maintain relationships with other animal welfare groups in the community, and on an official level. However, despite my repeated attempts to convince many of our staff and management of the value of working with these groups, there continues to be a lack of coalition spirit.
I am completely frustrated. Because I closely follow NMHP and all trends in animal welfare, I am well aware that the "lone wolf" philosophy will not help us save lives. I really want to enlighten my organization, but the traditional "animal control" mentality has so far proved insurmountable. I know many other shelters would be envious of the position we are in - so many groups willing to work together!! What can I do?
Response from Gregory:
If you have tried everything you know to overcome the defensive and negative attitudes of your management, and that avenue is a closed book, then there are only two ways of achieving change. First, to use the current vernacular, is regime change. Second, find more subtle ways of creating a new reality there.The first has certainly worked in some communities, but it has a lot of downsides. Negativity, public confrontation, instability and insecurity will all most likely occur before you reach a more positive outcome. There are no guarantees that you will bring about what you want.
The second can take many forms, depending on a lot of circumstances that you haven't detailed. But they will have in common that they are clearly focused on helping the animals. Only half an eye will be on the politics of the situation. Is there adequate leadership within the other groups to conduct coalition activity without initially involving your shelter? Could you create some joint activities and programs that establish some success, then later invite the shelter to participate? Are there other things the potential coalition could offer your shelter that the management would come to appreciate?
It's difficult to be more specific without knowing a lot more, but I've tried to outline some general principles here.
One final point: if your personal frustration becomes overwhelming, don't hit your head against a brick wall. Go help the animals somewhere else.
How rescue coalitions work with animal control
Question from Mary:
How do you envision rescue coalitions working with animal control agencies?Response from Gregory:
Let me tell you how we do things in the No More Homeless Pets in Utah program. A lot depends on what your different partners, private animal welfare organizations and government shelters (or humane societies with government contracts) are prepared to do together. You will need to be creative in finding ways around problems, including attitudes from one side to the other, traditional ways of thinking, and in some cases legal constraints. But where there is a will, all such problems can be overcome.Our ways of working center around the principle that we are looking for ways of guaranteeing healthy animals a home for life. There are very few government shelters that do this, so it is the 'no-kill' partners who provide the guarantee.
Our 'no-kill' partners are encouraged to get most of their animals from the shelters' euthanasia lists. They then put the dogs and cats into foster homes, or their own shelter facilities, and place them in their adoption programs. Any returned animals go back to the organization, not the shelter, so that they can then find a more suitable home, and thus be guaranteed life, rather than risking euthanasia at the shelter.
There are all sorts of ins and outs to the relationships that are developed between the private organizations and the government shelters. They range from being the greatest of friends, who have a real sense of working together, with a great appreciation on the shelters' part for the work of the 'no-kill' group, to relationships which can better be described as reluctant and tense.
There is an additional model which we've been developing in Utah for the past year, and which can have a lot of pluses. Best Friends started a partnership program with a municipal shelter in West Valley City, a suburb of Salt Lake City, and the municipality with the second highest population in the state. The shelter has old, rather run-down facilities, but a staff with a great attitude, as well as a very good level of cooperation from the higher ups in the city administration. The arrangement is that the shelter provides Best Friends with kennel space for about 10 dogs and a dozen or so cats. We take animals from their euthanasia list. Once they are transferred to our kennels they enter our adoption program, mostly going out on mobile adoptions. Any returned animals find another home through the program or by going to Best Friends Animal Sanctuary - again the guarantee.
We also organize special promotions at the shelter, which help their adoptions and ours, mobilize volunteers to assist the shelter, help with the spaying and neutering of their adoptables, etc.
The relationship has been exceptionally successful. Before it started, the euthanasia rate was around 65%. It is now down around 30%, with some months as low as 25%. Simultaneously, the shelter's own adoptions have come close to doubling. The program has worked so well that we are encouraging other organizations to establish similar relationships with government shelters - so far two others are in training.
Response from Jane:
In NYC we have positioned ourselves as all partners of a coalition. The New York Center for Animal Care and Control (CACC) is a participating organization of the Mayor's Alliance for NYC's Animals, with the focus being to help the CACC by taking transfers of animals which they cannot adopt out themselves.The Mayor's Alliance and its participating organizations hold a series of adoption events in our city parks throughout the summer and fall. Our first event was in Clove Lake Park in Staten Island, hosted by a local Staten Island rescue group (PLUTO Rescue of Richmond County). Our Manhattan Adoption and Pet Care Festival held in Central Park was "hosted" by the CACC since it has a shelter in Manhattan. The two Queens events will be "hosted" by Animal Haven, a shelter in Flushing, Queens and the Brooklyn event will be in Prospect Park and will be hosted by BARC Animal Shelter in Williamsburg, Brooklyn.
We hold training sessions at which all members send representatives, including the CACC, so we are all together as a whole, which is good for communication and good psychologically.
To borrow someone else's analogy, we are a battle group with the aircraft carrier as the center of the group. The rescue groups and other shelters are the battleships and cruisers all moving together in the war on pet overpopulation and homelessness
Can you help animals without working with the local shelter?
Question from a member:
Our coalition has been trying to work with our shelter for a year, but they refuse our help because of "philosophical reasons". We've met with our county. They seem to agree with the simple programs we are advocating, until the shelter follows up and meets with the county to tell them that what we're asking for (off-site adoptions, foster homes, Sunday shelter hours, TNR, etc.) is harmful to both the public and the animals. The shelter is sending out newsletters and mailings to its volunteers slamming our coalition, no-kill organizations, the no-kill movement and most importantly, the programs we are asking for, and we haven't even asked them to be no kill. We're becoming really restless after a year of this and don't see the point in wasting our time meeting with a shelter that refuses to accept programs that are proven to increase adoptions and decrease euthanasias. How do we take our message to the public, which the shelter perceives as us attacking them, and still let the shelter know that if they are truly serious about making these changes, we are willing to work with them?Response from Gregory:
It sounds like the shelter is not serious about making any changes. What they are serious about is NOT making changes, and condemning anyone who wants to do things differently. You are only wasting energy if they are THAT committed to their 'principles'. It is probably tempting for you to 'take your message to the public' by pointing out their deficiencies in the media, in order to mobilize opinion against them. There's plenty of raw material. You can point out that the shelter obviously prefers to kill animals than take advantage of your offers to help save them; that they are being cruel to the animals by refusing to let them go into the more humane environment of foster homes; that they are refusing help from qualified volunteers; that they are being irresponsible with public money by their spending on killing animals, rather than allowing you to find homes for them, which will cost them nothing; etc., etc.But bear in mind that if you take that route, you are getting into a huge fight. Fights take a lot of energy, and they ultimately waste a lot of energy. They also have unpredictable results. In a situation like this, success is not guaranteed.
Something that IS guaranteed is that the days of the shelter being able to maintain these policies are numbered. Time is on your side. There is a momentum behind the no-kill 'movement' which is unstoppable. In time they will have to cave in, or perhaps just fizzle slowly until their policies are more in tune with the times, public opinion, the direction animal welfare is heading, and your philosophy. In the long term, you will win; they will lose. It is tragic that more animals have to die in the meantime, but be careful not to waste your time.
Maybe a better policy is to stand back and devote your energies to maximizing the help your coalition can give the animals without involving the shelter. Help unwanted animals before they get to the shelter, put them in your foster homes, and take them to your mobile adoptions. If you cannot find enough animals in your community needing homes, or if your local ordinances prohibit you from taking in strays, put an ad in the paper telling people you are willing to help unwanted pets. Or, run your eye down the "homes wanted" classifieds and contact them. You will be preventing animals from getting into the hands of the shelter. Obviously you can also do this by running effective spay/neuter programs to prevent 'surplus' animals being born in the first place.
The message is that there is plenty you can do without the shelter. Bide your time, but help the animals.
Determining policies for a coalition
Question from a member:
How do your coalitions set policies in terms of what you will do, where you will spend your money, and who will have final say on what the coalition will and will not do? So many groups in our area have very differing policies on pediatric spay/neuter, adoption contracts, whether to adopt at holidays, etc. and I can't imagine trying to get one cohesive policy. Many of our groups would perceive that as us trying to take over their organization and what gives us that right to make their decisions.Response from Gregory:
We have one major advantage which you may not. Because Best Friends is the lead agency in a coalition which gets a substantial and generous grant from Maddie's Fund, we are able to pay quite a lot of the grant to participating coalition adoption groups. We don't take the approach that this enables us to 'bribe' groups to toe a particular line, but it is only natural that they are more willing to listen to us.If your coalition activities are financed by some of the member organizations, it would be only reasonable to give them seats, and votes, on a governing board, steering committee, etc. If you set things up that way, make sure that the participants are adult enough to appreciate that if they are outvoted, it shouldn't be the end of their involvement with the voting body!
On the subject of policies, in fact and in practice, we don't make policies on any of the examples you mention. We don't insist on pediatric spay/neuter - though we do make it a condition that any animal adopted intact for whatever reason has to be fixed within a set period of time. We don't dictate the content of adoption contracts, or require participating organizations to join in our holiday period adoptions. You don't need to do any of these things to run a successful coalition, which can be a huge help to the animals.
We do have some conditions. Participating organizations have to report their statistics to us, they have to agree in writing not to bad mouth other participants in public. And if we encountered a group that didn't believe in fixing their animals for example, we would not countenance them being in the coalition.
So, establish some simple, basic, broad, non-controversial conditions for joining. Put them in writing and have partner organizations sign off on them. If necessary to put people's minds at rest, tell them what you are NOT requiring them to agree to, then find ways of organizing coalition activities which will be a benefit to them.
And don't fall apart if one or two people gripe occasionally!
Response from Jane:
In NYC, the Mayor's Alliance has certain Terms of Participation, Funding and Dispute Resolution Policies that all groups have to adhere to. We ask that all groups have certain things in place like adoption agreements and contracts, but the contents of those agreements and contracts is up to the group as long as it contains some key terms.We try to allow each group to function as autonomously as possible provided they spay and neuter their animals and provide good care to the animals in their custody and participate in adoption programs either at their own local retail store sites or at city park sites or at our larger adoption events.
The Alliance is a separate tax-exempt organization with its own Board of Directors that functions as the lead agency for our Maddie's Fund grant application and as liaison with the City of New York on behalf of its Participating Organizations. The Participating Organizations are each separate organizations that determine their own policies as long as they comply with the Terms of Participation, etc.
Our biggest rule is no trash talking about other Participating Organizations in public. This has helped enormously to improve relations while allowing everyone to continue to do their own good work.
Using legislative means to help animals
Question from a member:
In many cases where coalitions have been successful, they have engaged their local government to support their new initiatives from a legislative perspective. But, I understand that some of these local governments initially come to the table kicking and screaming (e.g. about TNR and the mythical public safety risks; about no kill and the idea that this entails putting vicious dogs into homes, etc.). How can coalitions educate their county or state governments, especially when the local animal control is kicking and screaming about these programs as well? Also, what types of legislative support should coalitions ask for from their government (laws, ordinances, etc.)?Response from Gregory:
If you engage in a dialogue with government officials to straighten them out on these kinds of myths, probably your best tactics involve a) providing well-documented evidence that the programs you're proposing, or are already engaged in, are NOT the public danger the myths say they are, and b) pointing out that the authority will save money by supporting the programs. Generally, these are more effective than appeals to rectitude or duty to the public (however passionately you believe in those principles).When it comes to TNR, your best resource is undoubtedly Alley Cat Allies, who have had a lot of experience dealing with legislative issues, and can also advise on documenting results. It may be valuable to point to the results of similar programs in other communities as well as the results of your own programs.
You can document the results of your foster programs by providing evidence of the number of animals you have had in foster care, for how long, in homes with so many children, etc., how few cases of vicious dog bites have resulted, how many have been successfully adopted this way, and how many animals you have saved the local animal services agency from handling, and how much money you have saved the public as a result.
Do some research and find out how much it costs the agency to handle an animal, including how much it costs to euthanize one. I have heard figures as varied as $35 to $100 for this, so find out the local numbers.
Types of legislative support: If you think you can get the local authority to endorse TNR, go for it. Too often local ordinances are written in such a way as to make TNR illegal. The ideal is to get written into law the principle that TNR is mandated as the way to handle feral cat colonies in the community. But that's right at the top of your wish list. If you can just get wording changed in relevant ordinances to undercut any illegality associated with TNR, you will be ahead.
Legislation that mandates shelters to spay/neuter animals before they are released to the public (by redemption or adoption) is helpful - and seems like a no-brainer! In Utah, this has been done recently at the state level, but only applies to communities of 40,000 human population.
Another area is ordinances which limit the number of pets people can have in their homes. Many communities don't have such laws, but if yours does, it seems logical that increasing the number would enable more homes to be found for adoptable shelter animals.
If you're planning to work on any legislative issues, consider carefully the 'energy and time effectiveness' of doing it. While I support all such efforts, I query whether our time isn't better spent on helping the animals more directly. It's a personal decision depending on your talents, your life, and your resources. Consider it carefully.
Response from Jane:
The Alliance does not speak out on any legislative or regulatory matters. We agreed early on that the Alliance's individual members could and should continue to lobby and work on bills and regulations of interest to them, but that no one Alliance member should ever purport to speak for the Alliance on any legislation. If they wish they can support or oppose a bill, but to do so in that organization's name alone, not as an Alliance member. We decided it might be very difficult to get all Alliance members to agree on any one particular bill and no one bill was worth possibly tearing the Alliance apart. We decided that our mission to increase adoptions, increase spay/neuter surgeries and reduce the killing of cats and dogs in shelters was big enough and we would leave lobbying, etc., to the individual members that were already doing a good job in that area.Educating local government is another matter. We try to present the realities/facts of the no-kill philosophy and TNR whenever we can.
Top three tips on coalition building
Question from Jen:
Could you both give your three biggest tips for coalitions getting started TO do and the three biggest of what NOT to do? I'd love to hear what you both say so we don't reinvent the wheel!Response from Jane:
I'm not sure I have three in each category, but this is what I would recommend:Have a narrow mission so that as many groups as possible can agree to work together on it.
Try to be as inclusive as possible realizing some people may just need more time to take a look at what you are trying to do and join with you.
Agree that there will be no trash talking in public about each other.
Do not expect miracles overnight... settle in for a long haul... set realistic goals.
Response from Gregory:
To do:Establish a clear mission, clear goals for the coalition, and simple,
clear rules for participation.
Focus entirely on points of agreement, and encourage all partners to do the same.
Create a win/win situation. Devise coalition programs which benefit all coalition partners.
Not to do:
Don't waste time in excessive talking, planning, and meeting, at the expense of DOING.
Don't get hung up on differences over details of policy.
Don't allow arguments to develop between partners.
Determining the spokesperson for the coalition
Question from a member:
Do you ever have problems where the groups get upset with the direction of the coalition or don't want their name associated with it on certain subjects? We are trying to start up a coalition, but are finding that many of the groups are supportive of the concept, but don't want us speaking on their behalf without consulting them (and then they have to consult their board) on many issues or on joining in on programs and it really slows things down. It's not because they aren't supportive, but because they want their spokespersons giving their message.Response from Jane:
Well I am not sure what your "certain subjects" are that groups would want their spokespersons to speak out on instead of the coalition but in NYC the Alliance's direction is fairly straightforward and our message "simple": we want to increase adoptions and increase spay/neuter surgeries so the more people speaking out about those issues the better.But, and I think this is important in staving off disagreements, the Alliance does not speak on issues that do not fit within that message. For instance the Alliance does not comment on legislation or lobby so it cuts down on what people can find to disagree with each other about:-) There are already individual groups doing a very good job at this.
The Alliance is the liaison between the City of New York and the animal welfare groups that are members of the Alliance and the lead agency for the Maddie's Fund grant application.
We coordinated with the Veterinary Medical Association of New York City to prepare and file a Maddie's Fund grant application on behalf of the Alliance Participating Organizations and VMA NYC vets.
Therefore, we do fairly non-controversial things like work with the agencies of the City of New York to get parking permits and parking regulations changed to allow more parking around shelters (parking in NYC is a very big deal); coordinate adoption "events" in city parks which almost all the Alliance members participate in; try to secure park and store adoption sites in neighborhoods for individual Alliance groups, have training sessions to try to help the members of the Alliance do what they do even more effectively and better (such as How to Attract, Train and Retain Good Volunteers, Marketing and Public Relations 101, Grant writing, etc.), which is frankly more than enough to do.
Response from Gregory:
I think the key to avoiding this kind of problem lies in some of the answers we have given earlier in the forum. Make the mission of the coalition as simple and broad as possible. "Our mission is to eliminate the euthanasia of healthy animals in ______ County by the year _____. We will do this by increasing adoptions and spaying and neutering dogs and cats," for instance. If potential member organizations have a problem with that, then you don't want them as part of your coalition. You don't want people who believe your goal is impossible, or who don't believe in spaying and neutering.There is really no necessity for you to speak 'on behalf of other organizations', and you should make this clear to the participants. Also, don't ask them to speak on behalf of the coalition, unless you have designated them (with other groups' agreement) as spokespersons for the coalition. You should have such spokespersons, and it should be totally clear to everyone that they are speaking for the coalition, not an individual organization. If this principle is clear to everyone involved, and none have problems with it, it is quite possible for a spokesperson to give media interviews sometimes speaking for the coalition, and sometimes for an organization they may be part of.
Advice to such spokespersons: When speaking about your mission and principles, limit your remarks to those that fit within the subscribed-to mission statement. "The purpose of our coalition of animal welfare organizations is to work together to stop euthanasia in _____ County. So many healthy dogs and cats are put to sleep here it is a tragedy. We are adopting more of them and making it easier for people to spay and neuter their animals in order to end this."
When speaking about factual issues, there really should be no problem. "Last month, our coalition members increased their adoptions by 60% over last year at the same time. That's how effective the Super Adoption we held together was. And it resulted in the shelter euthanizing only a quarter of the animals they took in, instead of the usual half." Who can have a problem with that?
In my experience there is actually an irony about people and organizations being very particular about who is speaking on behalf of whom. It lies in the fact that most members of the viewing/listening/reading public don't manage to separate one animal organization from another anyway. Best Friends frequently is confused with 'Friends of Animal,' not to mention 'Second Chance' and PAWS! And apart from the occasional logistical glitch of one sort or another, it really doesn't matter that much.
Determining who takes the lead in the coalition
Question from Jean:
If you don't have a large or well-respected agency that is taking the lead in a coalition, how do you decide who will take a lead role? There are too many groups to have everyone represented on the steering committee and we just don't want to represent the largest groups. We have some good people who are willing to be on a steering committee, but none of them are with a group. In a way, we think that is good because they will be fair and not just representing their group, but we are afraid that many of the groups will feel like they are not represented and want a member on the committee.Response from Jane:
The Alliance was actually started by people who were not employed by or working with animal shelters or animal rescue groups per se. It was started by a group of lawyers who were on the Association of the Bar of the City of New York Committee on Animals and the Law. I think in some ways this was very helpful as no one organization's agenda was seen as being promoted ahead of the interests of the Alliance as a whole. The lawyers sort of saw it as trying to put together the best possible deal for their "clients" (the animal rescue groups and shelters). This meant negotiating with the City of New York to get certain non-financial resources such as the use of city parks for adoption events, parking permits, training sessions on subjects taught by experts in the areas of marketing, grant writing, training volunteers, etc. We did start with a committee of representatives from the larger well known groups and shelters so that the City would understand who they were dealing with, but we very quickly put out the message that the aim was to be as inclusive as possible. I think if you can begin to put resources at the disposal of the animal shelters and rescue groups as quickly as possible it becomes apparent that there really is not a lot to talk about. We just need to get on with trying to increase adoptions, increase spay/neuter surgeries and do what the groups and shelters are already doing even better... saving lives.Response from Gregory:
It's certainly important that coalition partners feel that they have a voice and means of communicating with other partners and with the coalition leadership. That's true, whether you have a strong organization taking the lead or not.I can think of a couple of ways of dealing with your situation. One way is to have one or more people associated with the coalition leadership whose function is to liaise with partner organizations. We have two because of the size of the geographical region we're dealing with. Their role is to communicate practical details of coalition activities and programs, to stay in very good touch with the partners, to know what they're thinking, feeling and planning within their own organizations, to help them connect with other partners, to help solve problems which arise, to provide them with coalition resources, and to listen to anything the partners want to say. When done right, we have seen that this can play a huge part in increasing the effectiveness of partner organizations.
There are no regular mass meetings to control policy, no voting, no large committees. We do hold an Idea Exchange every six months to which all are invited, but the purpose of this is more educational, networking and inspirational.
An alternative way is to have a steering committee (as you do), which certainly could be composed of 'unattached' individuals, and in addition have a general meeting every three, six, or twelve months. Invite everyone to attend, and give all the opportunity to discuss and express whatever is on his or her minds. I doubt if you can make this a controlling body, but that wouldn't be the purpose. Make it a forum for discussion, airing things, and networking. It also should play a valuable part in unifying the group and building esprit de corps.
Incidentally, if you do choose to take this second course, try to have someone who can be a liaison between the partners and the coalition leadership on a day-to-day basis also. They need to know that they have a reliable point of contact to communicate about ideas, problems, etc.
