TZI - Community Cat Management Jacksonville Florida

8/12/2019 TZI - Community Cat Management Jacksonville Florida

1/24

Community Cat ManagementJacksonville, Florida

1


2/24

Historical Perspective City JacksonvilleThe city of Jacksonville was founded as Cowford in 1791 as cattlemen used the area to

ford their livestock across the St. Johns River to move them to northern markets. After FloridaTerritory was sold to the United States by Spain in 1821, Cowford became known asJacksonville in honor of the first territorial governor, General Andrew Jackson. In the late 1800s,Jacksonville became a major winter destination with several notable industrialists as residents.That notoriety, along with the mild climate, made Jacksonville the Winter Film Capital of theWorld with more than 30 film companies, until Hollywood was formed and the film industryleft Florida.

In its more modern history, after nearly the entire city was destroyed by The Great Fireof 190 I , the increasingly mobile population of the 1920s found Jacksonville as the Gateway toFlorida due to the excellent railroad system and accessibility to the ocean by the St. Johns Riverports. That provided a wide variety of economic opportunities, but the region was segmented . In1968, the City of Jacksonville became the largest city in area in the lower 48 states, having beenmade a consolidated city-county government (and is the 3 th largest city in the United States).The consolidated city features an urban core with a modern city center and focused downtowndevelopment, suburban residential neighborhoods composed of both traditional and gatedcommunities, rural residential zones and agricultural areas, and the largest amount of land setaside for parks of any city in the entire country. t is also home to major naval installations.Jacksonville comprises 918 total square miles, of which 774 are land and 114 are water(primarily the St. Johns River).

The major players in the Jacksonville animal welfare community are the City ofJacksonville Animal Care & Protective Services, the Jacksonville Humane Society and FirstCoast No More Homeless Pets. Since 2008, these organizations have formed a uniquely focusedcoalition to move Jacksonville toward becoming a no-kill community.

2


3/24

Until the late 1970s, the City of Jacksonville operated itsanimal control program as an agency that picked up loosedogs and nuisance animals. Some were reclaimed by owners,Rnimal aro Protoctiuo Soruicos

NEVER STR Y FROM HOPE but most ended up being killed - there was no adoptionprogram. Realizing the need for expanding into more modern practices, the Animal CareControl Division was formed and an adoption wing was added to the operation. Remarkably, thesterilization of all adopted animals was not accomplished until the early 2000s. Prior to that,responsible adopters made aITangements to have their newly adopted animals sterilized, but mostadopted animals were not sterilized. Jacksonville took a step forward by starting the SpayJaxProgram that afforded low cost and free sterilizations to those citizens that received some formof public assistance and started sterilizing adoption animals in-house. In 2007, the cityrestructured and modernized its operations. A new shelter was built, a new management teamwas hired and n w programs began. In late 2009, Animal Care Protective Services and its newfacility vcre l\ ' if d \\ ith a new plan of how to best serve the community.

The Jacksonville Humane Society (JHS) has been a fixture in animalwelfare for more than 125 years. At one time, it split the animalcontrol function with the City through a contractual relationship. In2005, JHS stopped operating as an open admission shelter and endedits contractual relationship with Jacksonville to provide any animal

control functions. The relationship with the City shifted to a contract to assist in the placement ofhomeless and unwanted pets that were removed from the municipal shelter. In 2007, theJacksonville Humane Society's facilities experienced a severe fire, destroying much of theirfacilities. Although the original capacity of the shelter was rebuilt, a current capital campaign isunderway to build a state-of-the-art facility in the near future. A community animal hospitalrecently opened on their campus.

First Coast No More Homeless Pets (FCNMHP) was founded in 2001 inresponse to the City of Jacksonville's desire to create a city-funded spay/neuterprogram. In 2009, F NMHP opened the largest spay/neuter clinic in the U.S.with a designed capacity of 200 daily sterilization surgeries. Founder andexecutive director Rick DuCharme was a pioneer in pulling together resources ina very short period of time to allow the City of Jacksonville to transform fromold traditional methods to the innovation of all-in feral cat management overnight

with his Feral Freedom program. The Feral Freedom program led to a comprehensive, activecommunity cat management philosophy throughout Jacksonville.

3


4/24

A Historical Snapshot ofJoint Jacksonville Statistics

Jacksonville Shelter Statisti s2001-2012

32,000

27,000

.E 22,000I - Intake-- - Shelter DeathsV 17,000..0E - Live ReleaseZ

12,000

7,000

2,000

Jacksonville Community Cat anagementLike most government-run animal control agencies, Jacksonville previously utilized the

traditional practice of trapping feral cats, holding them a specified period of time and thenputting them down en masse. Virtually no cats trapped and deemed feral were ever reclaimed byowners, nor were they afforded other opportunities for rescue or trap, neuter and return. In fact,ear tipped cats were not allowed to be reclaimed or returned under the original practices of theCity of Jacksonville. Those practices began to change in 2008.

A simple request for the City of Jacksonville to consider revlsmg its long-standingpractice of not allowing ear-tipped cats to be reclaimed by feral cat colony caregivers turned intosomething much bigger than ever anticipated. FCNMHP s Rick DuCharme approached the Cityabout not euthanizing ear-tipped feral cats, which were often being sterilized through hisorganization, and allowing them to be returned to the colony. The City S director of


5/24

Environmental Compliance (an engineer by trade and education) not only authorized the returnof ear-tipped cats, but also suggested that if that was good for some feral cats it should be goodfor all feral cats. With virtually no knowledge of the earth-shaking decision in the animal controlarena that had just been made by Jacksonville Animal Care & Control, the City laid down agauntlet for the private sector to rise t the challenge of implementing a non-governmentfinanced TNR program on a massive scale. That challenge to Mr. DuCharme planted the seedthat would grow into Feral Freedom.

The program began with the simple policy memorandum that all healthy trapped feralcats would be turned over to F . 'MH P for the Feral Freedom program. All costs of the programand logistics of removing the ats from the public shelter were taken on by the not-for-profitspay/neuter clinic. Fundi ng \\ a. provided through grants, including seed money for the start ofthe program from Best Friend Animal Society, and other private funds so the only cost to thecity of Jacksonville was 1 hold the trapped cats for a few hours until they were picked up at oneof two daily pickup time . That unique arrangement allowed government officials to broadlyaccept the Feral Fr d m program as a pilot cat management initiative and cost-savings program.The mayor and hi -wff provided the necessary education to the city council, and the F ralFreedom program \\ a. underway with unilateral supp0l1. All questions related to the programwere refened [ .fa 'k. onville Animal Care & Control and/or First Coast No More Homeless Pets.

Th ommunity cat management program was supported in general by the JacksonvilleMuni ci pal Ordinance, which stated if the city chose to embark on a feral cat managementprogram . it would be done at the discretion of the Chief of Animal Care & Control. TheprO\ ision had been added years prior to the advent of Feral Freedom and no one could haveunderstood how that simple provision was vital to the growth and success of the program.

Under the newly hired management of an experienced public animal sheltering director,Jacksonville began its transition into modem animal control and sheltering while it workedclosely with all community animal welfare advocates and organizations to bring about change .The new Jacksonville Animal Care & Protective Services Division for the City of Jacksonvillemoved forward in a public/private effort to control its feral and other outdoor community cats.

5


6/24

Early Challenges nd LearningJacksonville had few, if any, models to follow as they envisioned their nev i community

cat management program because of the unique characteristics of the city. In some mostly ruralareas, cats had never been seen as much of an issue. In other areas, poorly managed cat colonieshad become an urban and business problem. However, as a river city with a strong port andriver/ocean-influenced economy, Jacksonville has always had cats as part of the neighborhoodlandscape often assisting in ridding the city of rats and other nuisances.

With the best of intentions and what seemed like a solid plan, the city and FCNMHPwent from no feral cat program to lOO percent trap, neuter and return literally overnight. The firstthought was that proactive education would be the best way to make people aware of the newchanges. Informational flyers were made available and Feral Freedom program door hangerswere placed on all houses within a few blocks of where community cats were returned. Thatprogram was handled entirely by FCNMHP. Jacksonville's Animal Code Enforcement Officersadditionally took on a new role of educating the citizens they came in contact with in the fieldwhenever the 0ppoliunity arose.

The new division chief for the city initially tried to develop and foster education to gainwidespread suppOli for community cat management through sterilization and return. That wasmuch more difficult than originally imagined. Animal control officers were now being asked toeducate the public on the benefits of a program of returning loose cats to the community, whichwas contrary to everything they had been taught about animal control in their formal training.Several of the officers began to understand and accept the pi lot program but were still not thrilledabout publicizing the program. Other officers were forced to accept the new program as citypolicy and were told if they opposed the program they needed to fin oth er employment.

A few months into the program, it was found that \\ hen y er and \\-here,-er the FeralFreedom program educational materials were distributed and /or where officers took proactiveeducational opportunities to inform the public, a spike in complaints about cat nuisance problemsand the program were quick to follow. Seeing this trend , Jacksonvi H Animal Care ProtectiveServices (JACPS) pulled back from proactive education and settled into a posture of answeringall inquiries directly and honestly, but not providing information that wasn t asked about.FCNMHP continued to provide educational information to neighbors. That quieted things downconsiderably as thousands of cats were being sterilized and returned to the community. Aftersome additional time passed, FCNMHP also took a more passive educational stance. The overalltheory of JACPS and FCNMHP was that if sufficient experiential data was amassed, the citizensand policy makers would see the value of the program.

To that end, all of the first Feral Freedom cats were implanted with radio frequencyidentification (a.k.a. microchipped ) and registered so they could be tracked . This was done toaddress the concerns that these cats would be hit by cars, bite people, starve to death, be attacked

6


7/24

by dogs, and many other hypothetical tragedies that would nullify the program. After more thana year of such identification, absolutely none of the more than 6,000 feral cats with the microchipRFID were ever identified as falling into any of those theoretical situations. The cost of theprogram was then re-budgeted to the sterilization and release of additional cats and the RFIDprogram was ended for Feral Freedom. More than four years later, there still have been noidentified Feral Fr dom at that have been involved in these types of incidents.

During th fi r 'r y ar of operation, weekly , and sometimes daily, communication aboutthe progrnn1 \ \ 3 exchang d by the chief of JACPS and the executive director of FCNMHP.Through that mmunicati n. the two groups identified what was working and what wasn't.Modifications to proto 1 loo k place and adjustments were tested until they worked. This wassomething that c uld ha\ ne\'er been foreseen when Jacksonville enacted an ordinance with asimple statement that feral cat program would be initiated at the discretion of the divisionchief, but that fl exibiliry prm ed invaluable. After two years of what started out as sometimes bigchanges and adj u:::.tm nL- b t:came almost insignificant tweaking . At that time, program detailswere formally drafted for inc lusion in the city ordinance. [Attachment]

One of th mo ( important lessons learned early on is that a single unifonn message mustbe presented. City council members, the mayor's staff, the City call center and other governmententities forwarded all questions, comments and concerns directly to the division chief for aresponse. That unifom1 message killed many misunderstandings and showed all parties were onthe sam page. n r were no holes for people or groups to try to gain a foothold to derail theprogram . ')\1, it is -imply a matter of course that the program is part of the City ' s operation, ande\'en \\ ilh ne" C unc i members elected, the uniformity of message remains .

essons Learned n acksonville1. Be flexible in forming and modifying original program details

Don't be overly aggressive in initial promotion of program until the bugsare worked out and you have a track record

3. Uniformity of message is essential - top-down driven by leaders (ifpossible have one person answer all questions and media)

-I. Go all-in if at all possible - results will be confusing or incomplete ifyou don't sterilize a major p0l1ion of the population quickly

5. After your program is in place and working, then solidify it with ordinancelanguage to support/establish program

7
http:///reader/full/adju:::.tmhttp:///reader/full/adju:::.tmhttp:///reader/full/adju:::.tmhttp:///reader/full/adju:::.tm


8/24

hangesto at ntake at Jacksonville1100010500100009500

900085008000

- Stray Cat Intake

rYl -LL >-LL >-LL >-LL >-LL >-LL >-LL >-LL >-LL >-LL

The traditional model over years across Florida and the United States was that regardlessof the efforts made to trap, hold, and kill, the intake of cats was on a yearly increase. Thatsituation held for JACPS as well. A decrease was experienced when JHS stopped acceptingdirect intake of feral cats, cutting the capacity for feral cat intake in Jacksonville nearly in half.With the early advent of the Feral Freedom program and its publicity, there was a very modestincrease in cats entering the shelter most likely due to some feral cat caregivers bringing in catsto be sterilized and returned to them with the new program. Following that one-time increase,however, the number of cats entering the open-admission, public shelter run by JACPS hasdecreased.

tray1080010300

98009300 - Stray88008300

FY06 07 FY07 08 FY08 09 FY09 10 FYlO 11 FYll-12

When looking specifically at the timeline of the program, it shows a decrease coming intothe year the Feral Freedom program began August 2008) followed by the one-time spike. Thena dramatic drop in intake the following year is seen, followed by further decreases at a reducingrate. The number of owner-surrendered cats is more consistently affected by the program.

8


9/24

Surrender2700

2200

1700 Surrender

1200

7 r . _ . . _ ~ ~FY06 07 FY07 08 FY08 09 FY09 10 FY10 11 FYll 12

Under the previous trap-and-kill program, many o the cats surrendered by citizens werecats that these people were caring for when an animal code enforcement officer or neighborconfronted them about such behavior being illegal and they brought them into the shelter toavoid citations. Others were outside cats that the citizen felt they were responsible for untilthey were made aware outside cats were not allowed by ordinance. One major problem wasthat these people often found other cats after they relinquished the existing cats and it was avicious circle o trap and kill with no decrease in population and no change in caregiverbehavior.

With Feral Freedom. these people were able to keep caring for outside cats as long asthey met the requirements o the program and the cats were sterilized, vaccinated and ear-tipped.JACPS officials feel that it is primarily for that reason that such a dramatic and continuing dropin owner surrenders o cats has occurred. This is further supported by the drop in the number onuisance calls that have been received by animal code enforcement officers regarding stray andunwanted cats. The overall cat-related calls and incidents have dropped over the course o theprogram to a negligible number.

What is sometimes viewed as unique in Jacksonville is that the vast majority (well over9 percent) o all outdoor cats that are cared for by caregivers are in numbers o five or less. Thepreviously seen large colonies have ceased to be a model and individual backyard smallgroupings are the norm. This model works well in that many neighbors are okay with a few catsliving nearby that may periodically come into their yard as opposed to large colonies creatingnuisances and having large food drops attracting wildlife and rats. The overall burden o outdoorcats has shifted to individuals and the public, rather than being an animal control or publicproblem.

9


10/24

Feral at Surgery Funding Sources11500 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -10500 - - - - - -9500 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -8500 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -7500 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6500 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Individuals5500 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Feral Freedom4500 1 - 7 ------ ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;:;;;:;:::::=:=3500 - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2500 ______ ______ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -1500 +-__ - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

500FY07 08 FY08 09 FY09 10 FYI0 11 FY11 12

Now that there is an alternative to surrendering and having the feral cats euthanized,caregivers are allowed to be more open in their work. This has built a more cohesive carecommunity and allowed the sharing of successes and failures for overall better managementpractices to be disseminated. Remarkably the "decriminalization" of caring for feral and outdoorcats has also changed the attitude of the public as to who is or should be responsible for cats inthe neighborhood. There has been a dramatic resource shift in which, sterilization surgeries areincreasingly being funded by individuals. After the initial seed money of the community catprogram, the private sector is taking on the lion's share of the financial burden . The rapid risecoincides with the removal of the stigma of being a crazy cat lady" and the removal ofbarriers/legal issues associated with providing these cats with care and surgery .

A random sample of the individuals utilizing the privatelindividual payment option foundthat people listed the following as reasons they didn't go through Feral Freedom:

1. Saving Feral Freedom funds for those who can't afford to pay2. No need for City to fund the surgeries if there is a low-cost option3. Guarantee their cats are returned to them and not adopted out of shelter4. No risk of the cats being euthanized rather than returned for any reason

10


11/24

Euthanasia of ats t Jacksonville CPSAnother measure o the success or value o a community cat management program is

based on the changes to the euthanasia totals for the community. n this case study, thebreakdown o euthanasia was taken in various cross sections to both show results and to ensurethat results are correlated to the community cat program and not a coincidence o reducedeuthanasia shelter-wide due to other administrative or program changes. t should be noted thatdramatic program changes t operations o JACPS have taken place since late 2008 (FY2009)that have affected all areas o the operation. The following chart shows overall live outcomesversus shelter deaths as a percentage o intakes as a baseline reference:

r Jacksonville Euthanasia ive Outcome as a Percentage o Intake75.065.055.045.0 - Euthanasia

- Live Outcome35.025.0

\ ith that overall snapshot o JACPS euthanasia and live outcomes, the focus ocommunity cat program results can be evaluated by isolating specific measures o the program aswell as correlation factors .

11


12/24

llCat Euthanasia12000

10000

8000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6000

4000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ ~ - - - - - - - -2000

FY06-07 FY07-08 FY08-09 FY09-10 FYlO-ll FYll-12

In order to accurately measure feral cat/community cat euthanasia at JACPS, it wasdetermined that the subcategories for all cats euthanized for feral , previous behavior, andbehavior observed would be considered feral cats for the purposes of the community cat case

study. All other reasons are lumped together as non-feral euthanasia reasons . There may be somecrossover in other subcategories but this seemed to make the most accurate measure.

Euthanasia: Feral & Behavior

4300 . . . . - - - -3300 ~ \ 2300 \ -1300 - - - - - - - - - ~ ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

300 ~ ~ ~ ~ _ . _ -FY 6 -07 FY07 -08 FY 8 -09 FY 9 -10 FYlO-ll FYll-12

Euthanasia: Non-Feral Cats

6000

40002000 ~ r ~ r _ ~ _ ~ L _

06-07 FY 7-08 FY08-09 09-10 FYlO-ll FYll-12

As the charts show, the program changes that have resulted in reductions in the deathrates of non-feral cats are not directly correlated to the feral cat euthanasia rates and thecorresponding reductions in death rates due to the Feral Freedom program. The reduction in feralcat deaths at the shelter is much more dramatic and consistent in its reduction over the course ofthe community cat management program. There are unique patterns in the non-feral cateuthanasia trends and not reflected in the feral cat euthanasia trends . When the euthanasianumbers are translated into a percentage of the total intake of cats, the results affirm that nocorrelation exists between operational changes in handling all cats at JACPS and community cateuthanasia reductions.

12


13/24

atEuthanasia s Percentage o Intake50.0%

40.0%

300

20 .0cv

--

NonFeralFeral & Behavior

O,()

0.0% JI-- y . . - -----FY06-07 FY07-08 FY08-09 FY09-10 FYIO-ll FYll-12

~ ~ ~

The conclusion is that a feral cat program positively affects the drop in euthanasia rate forthe community. Since a large portion of cat intake in most shelters is composed of the feral catsif sterilized release is possible rather than a euthanasia requirement the number of shelter deathsof cats is going to go down. An unexpected benefit of not having to handle feral cats in thetraditional manner was the resulting increase in live outcomes for non-feral cats and the othersavings to the organization.

Feral Freedom ommunity at Returns6000

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

0

/ ~//

FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012

13


14/24

Increased Live Outcomes or Non-Feral Cats: An Unexpected BenefitNon-Feral: Adoption RTO Rescue Transfers

2800

2300

1800

1300

800FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012

In addition to the thousands of community cats returned to their neighborhoodsJacksonville has seen a marked increase in other live outcomes through direct adoption rescuesand transfers to other area shelters for adoption. The numbers went from just over 900 inFY2007 to nearly 2900 in FY2012. What are the likely contributing factors that relate to overallcat management?

The first change identified was the decrease in upper respiratory infection among cats inthe shelter. That not only made the cats more adoptable it saved space and resources by nothaving cats moved to a sick ward after being put up for adoption. t was determined that with thecontact between st ff and feral cats the st ff acted as fomites moving germs among the catpopulation even when the most stringent protocols were in place to limit disease transfer. Giventhe uncertain history of animals entering a public shelter and their acquired immunity the feralcat population was often either a carrier of URJ or became an incubator due to the lack ofacquired immunity with no vaccination antibody buildup. Once that variable was eliminated theoverall health of non-feral cats improved greatly.

Another identified change was that the total housed cat population was reducedeffectively in half which allowed st ff more time to care for properly clean and address needs ofthe resident cat population. t could possibly be demonstrated that an increase in staffing with thetraditional feral cat program would result in similar reductions in disease but that too becomes anew cost of the traditional model that has shown ineffective over decades of use. With more timeper cat fewer things slip through the cracks and fewer comers are cut in doing daily protocol

14


15/24

because the employees responsible for the care are less overworked. The total number o "caredays" (defined as one cat housed per day is one cat care day) dropped from 89,217 cat care daysin FY2007 to 23 ,752 cat care days in FY2011.

Additionally, resources are no longer wasted in capture, transfer, housing, care, feedingand euthanasia o feral cats. Much o that savings in the Jacksonville example was returned inthe budget process as reductions in costs to the municipal program, but a portion o that savingswas able to be used to improve the condition o the cats remaining in the care o and ultimatelyplacement from the shelter. Even foster programs were expanded to deal with young kittens toosmall for surgery (although there is still a large number o neonatal, nursing kittens without amother that unfortunately do not survive currently in Jacksonville).

Cats Average Days n Adoptions

8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~Y 2 7 FY2 8 Y 2 9 Y 2 1 Y 2 11 Y 2 12

33 ~28

23 ~ 18

3 ~

The actual number o days a cat spends in adoptions before placement has reducedgreatly in Jacksonville. This reflects the removal o recovery days for sick animals and a revisiono hold times prior to adoption based upon the low reclaim rate for cats. Quicker turnover in catsfurther reduces the costs associated with care, feeding and medical costs. It also limits additionalthe exposure to disease and cross-contamination from the public serving as fomites between catshandled in adoptions. This has proven a better model. Quick turnaround often means that evenwhen a cat breaks out with URI at an adopter's home , it is easier and less expensive to assist intreating that cat in its new home rather than returning it to the shelter.

15


16/24

Cost nd Savings from a Comprehensive Community Cat ProgramOne overriding question and concern that everyone seems to have from the administra tive

standpoint is, "How much money is this program going to save us? That should not be theprimary focus of determining whether or not to implement a community cat program. In fact, it isa question that should be removed from consid eration of a program that has positive results .Jacksonville' s experience, while not guaranteed to translate directly to other areas , will illustrateboth hard cost savings and soft cost savings. Not everything in the change to community catmanagement can be measured in dollars and not all savings are immediate.

The community cat management program costs have been carefully analyzed and brokendown into expenses/costs saved that otherwise would have had to be expended under the traphold-euthanize-dispose scenario, expenses incurred by the program t at are related tosterilization, potential capital cost savings , and other costs for consideration in program planning.Whenever possible, the inclusion of cost factors ha ve been identified , but in some cases theysimply have been folded into a general cost factor. Every aspect of cost has been reviewed andincluded into the breakdown - these numbers reflect actual costs in Jacksonville.

Staffing Cost with Trap Ho/d Euthanize DisposeStaffing Events Time Saved ost Estimate Total per at

Capture & Transport Inc. disposal) 60 min. 20/hr. 20.00ntake Processing & Cage Transfer 20 min. 15/hr. 5.00

Care & Cleaning 15 min./day 3 day hold 10.75Euthanasia Procedure 30 min. 2 people 15 .00

50.75

When looking at the staffing cost estimates in this Jacksonville example, all costs ofhealthcare benefits and other fringes are included in the hourly wage calculations. Estimates oftime are based on the processes and protocols of JACPS and your local estimates of time mayvary (as your cost of labor probably will as well) . In Jacksonville, the direct staffing impact ofimplementing the community cat program included the elimination of two kennel positions andone field operations position over a three-year period. The kennel positions were eliminated inthe second year of the program and the officer was eliminated in the third year.

16


17/24

ardCosts: Supplies, Food and Other Tangible ItemsItems Saved Cost per Cat/Day Total Per Cat

Food Care & Cleaning Supplies 3/day $9.00Euthanasia & Disposal Supplies $4 per cat 4.00Vaccinations Me dical Supplies $17 per cat $17 .00

30.00

With all figure:: induded in this analysis, the actual costs of each step or program areshown. That III nn, Iha t a reduction in one area may also be shown as a cost in another area.Overall net co:ts \\ill be reflected in a chart of combined costs and sav ings .

\ ltl1 ugh Jac k 'on ville benefitted from extensive private non-profit contributions to fundthe ac tual 0 t f the community cat program, meaning no out-of-pocket costs for the City ofJac k om ille, the fo il \\-ing chart lists the estimated costs if all program costs were handled inhouse and fun d d by the city shelter operations. This was done to allow a more comparableanalysis for other communities that may have to fund such programs directly.

Expenses/Costs Associated with Community Cat Program In-House)Expense Item Cost per Catntake Feeding Prep $13.75

Surgery Items Vaccinations Labor $59.00Return to Location $7 .50

80.25

It is possible that some program costs could be reduced through the use of volunteers oreven by contracting services to other providers. The chart was meant primarily to help identifyall of the cost items and provide an example of expected co sts for community cat programs.

17


18/24

otal Feral Cat Community Cat Management Costs by Fiscal YearFY06-07 FY07-08 FY08-09 FY09-10 FY1O ll FYl1 -12Total Feral Intake 5034 4647 6035 5019 4759 ~Traditional Labor Costs/Cat $35.75 $35.75 $35.75 $35.75 $35.75 $35.75Traditional Hard Costs/Cat $16.00 16.00 $16.00 16.00 16.00 $16.00Total Traditional Cost 260,510 213,986 0 0 0 0Feral Euthanasia 5034 4135 871 693 553 326Cost Labor/Supplies/Disposal 19.00 19.00 19.00 19.00 19.00 19.00Total Euthanasia Feral Costs 95,646 78,565 16,549 13,167 10,507 6,194Community Cats Returned 0 512 5164 4326 4206 3934Labor Hard Costs/Cat $80.25 $80.25 $80.25 $80.25 $80.25 $80.25Total ommunity Cat Cost 0.00 41,088 $414,411 347,162 337,532 315,704Net Total Cost Outlays c.c. 356,156 333,639 430,960 360,329 348,039 321,898

The experience of the Jacksonville program indicate there is a declining cost to theprogram over time. Additionally, there has been an upward trend in cat intake that has beenreversed by the implementation of the program. Those cost savings have been estimated basedon a traditional five-day stray hold most organizations utilize for cats in the chart below.

Total Non-Feral Cat Program Expenses by Fiscal YearFY06-07 FY07-08 FY08-09 FY09-10 FYIO-ll FYll-1

Total Non-Feral Intake 8421 8216 6882 5668 4789 5357Traditional 5-day Hold Costs $66.25 $66.25 $66.25 S66.25 $66.25 $66.25Traditional Hard Costs/Cat $557,891 544,310 $455,933 5 75,505 $317,271 354,90Non-Feral Euthanasia 7134 6903 5521 3852 2924 2315Euthanasia/Disposal/Cat $19.00 $19.00 $19.00 $19.00 $19.00 $19.00Total Non-Feral Euthanasia $135,546 $131,157 104.899 $73,188 $55,556 $43,98Adopti oniOutp lacement 962 867 1274 1767 1823 2903Cost Surgery/Transfer $62.75 $62.75 $62.75 $62.75 $62.75 $62.75Total Live Outcome Expenses 60,366 54,404 $79,944 ]JO,879 $114,393 $182,16Additional Days in Adoption 22,126 25,143 8,918 9,856 4,735 6,400Beyond Hold Period 5 days)Cost of Care, Food, Labor/Day $6.25 $6.25 $6.25 $6.25 $6.25 $6.25Additional Adoption Costs $138,288 $157,144 $55,738 $61,600 $29,594 $40,00Adoption Fees Collected $29,250 $31,005 $36,810 $40,320 $47,340 $72,00Total Net Adoption Costs 109,038 $126,139 $18,928 21,280 < 17,746> < 32,00Net Cost Outlay Non-Feral $862,841 856,010 659,704 580,852 $469,474 549,0

18


19/24


20/24

Other Community Cat anagement Costs Savings alld Intangibles1 Increased employee morale2 Increased productivity from shelter workers3. Improved community support and growing volume n m4. Decreased need for shelter space for feral cat hou ing5 Decreased worker s compensation injuries and claims6 Reduced risks of disease transfer and associated medic al .: st.7 Increased visibility of your community on national stage

The increase in employee morale and productivity that is experienced with th r ducl ionof euthanasia and increase in live outcomes should not be undervalued. The increas d m rale hnearly eliminated turnover except where employees are able to advance their careers. Thincrease in productivity has allowed JACPS to cut its labor force by 26 percent, while brecognized as the Outstanding Animal Control Agency in Florida by the Florida Animal ControlAssociation. The combination of successful outcomes has brought national attention toJacksonville as a national model of public sheltering success.

When employees do not see or have to assume that when cats come in they will have tobe euthanized after a short period of time being cared for, they can focus their energy on thepositive rather than lament in the negative. Even in the field operations, the productivity hasincreased dramatically.

3500340033003200310030002900280027002600

///.......... //

a llsPe r fficer

~ \ ~ c ovel vel

20


21/24

The enthu iasm of the team and the recognition of the positive changes have broughtforth a major incr a - in community involvement in Jacksonville. At times, the number of peoplewanting to C1. n lh o rganization has oven:vhelmed the ability to respond to them. In the longhaul, the in volunteers and foster caregivers will make the job easier for shelteremployee and mean more animals get adopted into forever homes. This evolution is stillunden \ in Ja -l om i !le, but it has shifted focus to expanding the thought process of wherean ima l - n d to in order to find new homes. That would not have been possible without

limmat ing all of lh negativity surrounding the old trap-hold-kill-dispose feral cat program .AI"o. lh 'ornmU!lilY ees the organization as citizen friendly in that the organization betterreflects what Lh mmu nity has been doing for decades in caring for animals. Instead of tryingto punish them f r d ing a good deed, the organization helps them to understand the right way todo things and a: \ ilh tough issues.

Dep "ndl n \\'here a community is in planning for new facilities , expanding olding existing facilities, an unexpected and potentially sizeable cost reductionin capi ta l ' n ilUf" can be realized by full-scale community cat management. In theJackso l1\ il l ' . th program began as a new shelter was being completed and changes tothe fac il m \ po : . ib le. However, planned space was able to be repurposed for better and a

Ch r 650 square feet dedicated to the housing of feral cats was able to beto S8 1 250 in average construction costs saved (using $125/sq. ft.); or if

w, . . it would cost the City of Jacksonville an additional 8,500- 9,000 peryear in bUi dm..; fi nlal f r that amount of space if they needed to expand operations withoutco n tru-(

II uipmcn t not already been ordered for the housing of the feral cats, the cityart ) - 100,000 in capital costs for housing facilities for the cats. These rooms

r 'J to offices, warehouse space, a behavioral assessment room, and otherl::..nn'd operational needs-truly a hidden gem in the implementation of the

Lom sTa mmark d increase in medical costs in recent years, the reduction in injuries andLn, ta ff and feral cats has been a major cost savings for the operations of

J lP ral ches and other related injuries primarily from fractious cats account forn arh - \\l: rkcr ' s compensation incidents in Jacksonville. Since these animals nowenter th In ca , : . remain in cages until transfer, and are fed in cages , the incidentnumbers ha\ w r .: d dramatically. Even with increasing annual costs across the board IIImedical area . J.\ P h- - . ee n a sizeable reduction in worker's compensation premiums.

The reduction in ross-contamination, airborne and fomite-borne transfer, and otherdisease exposure amon g rhe cat population has nearly eliminated the need for a large sick cat

21


22/24

ward. That n tum has reduced medical expenditures and decreased the time a cat stays in theshelter before being adopted or placed into a new home. Upper respiratory infections amongadult cats are negligible and even among the kitten population; the reduction has been verynoticeable with only minor transmission incidents observed.

Finally moving to more progressive and twenty-first century practices by fullyimplementing a comprehensive community cat program helps your community gain recognitionas a leader. There have been countless dozens of individuals and agencies that have come toJacksonville to see how things are done and how they are working to model programs in theirareas. National organizations have not only been supporters of the programs they have askedkey players to present at conferences write articles do webinars and other outreach to the animalsheltering community. J CPS employees when asked say they have gone from being theredheaded stepchild no one wants to talk about to now being on the front line with theJacksonville Mayor conducting press conferences and pleas directly from the shelter.


23/24

Sample Ordillallce Language or Community Cat ManagementCity of Ja k onville Municipal Ordinance

Sec. 4 2.101. - De finitions.For the purposes of this Chapter, the following terms shall have the following definitions

unless the context clearly requires otherwise .(i) Community Cat means any free-roaming cat that may be cared for by one or

more residents of the immediate area who is /are known or unknown; acommunity cat mayor may not be feral. Community cats shall be distinguishedfrom other cats by being sterilized and ear tipped; qualified community cats areexempt from licensing, stray and at-large provisions of this ordinance and maybe exempt from other provisions directed toward owned animals.

Sec. 462.312. - Feeding of cats and dogs outdoors.(a) Rules applicable to all dogs and cats , excluding managed community cats covered insubsection b) below, are as follows:

I) The feeding of cats and dogs outdoors shall take place primarily during daylight hoursto minimize the risk of domestic-wildlife interactions that have increased potential ofrabies exposure for the cats or dogs. Any food provided after daylight hours shall only beprovided for such time required for feeding, and no longer than 30 minutes, after which itshall be removed .(2) Feeding outdoors is only allowed when an appropriate amount of food for dailyconsumption of the cat(s) and/or dog(s) being cared for is provided. Food must beappropriately placed in a sanitary container sufficient for the cat/dog being fed.Automatic feeders that are properly maintained and secured may be used to dispensedaily food rations and may be present during night hours.(3) Dumping excess quantities offood on the ground, placing excess quantities in bowlsor other containers, and leaving open food packages is prohibited.(4) Feeding outdoors must take place on the property owned by the person placing thefood or be done with the consent of the property owner. Feeding on public propelty, roadright-of-ways, parks, common land of a multifamily housing unit or any property withoutconsent of the owner is prohibited.(5) Violations of this section are subject to a fine of not less than the amount designatedin ha ter 462 , Part 8 .

{b, mmunit ct Management Initiatives: The City of Jacksonville recognizes the need forinnO\ li n n dr s ing the issues presented by feral, free roaming and other community cats. Tothat end it n gm Ihat there are community care givers of cats, and acknowledges that

23


24/24

properly managed community cats may be part of the solution to the continuing euthanasia ofcats; and establishes the following requirements:

1) All managed community cat colonies/groups must be maintained on private propertyof the caregiver, or with permission on the private property of another landowner(including city, state, and federal public property).(2) A free community cat caregiver certification program may be developed to educatepeople about community cats, the importance of a veterinary provider relationship to bestaddress community cat needs, common disease(s) and proper care, good managementpractices, and maintenance of the community cats. The educational program shall bedeveloped by community veterinarians, community cat caregivers, ACPS and citizensthrough an ad hoc advisory committee that will be disbanded upon recommendation tothe Chief of ACPS. The Chief ofACPS may remove any member at any time for anyreason within his/her discretion. Periodically, ad hoc committees will be convened toreview, revise and update the program as needed.(3) All cats that are part of community cat management programs must be sterilized,vaccinated against the threat of rabies, and ear-tipped (preferable on the left ear) for easyidentification; if these requirements are met the community cat is exempted fromlicensing, stray, at-large and possibly other provisions of this ordinance that apply toowned animals .(4) a person is providing care for the community cats, he or she is required to providecertain necessities on a regular/ongoing basis, including, but not limited to, propernutrition and medical care as needed. medical care is unavailable or too expensive, thecaregiver must not allow the cat to suffer.

(i) Food must be provided in the proper quantity for the number of cats beingmanaged and is to be supplied no less than once per day . Food must bemaintained in proper feeding containers.(ii) Water, if supplied, must be clean, potable and free from debris and algae .(iii) If shelter is provided, it shall be unobtrusive, safe, and of the proper size forthe cat(s) .

(c) Violations of this section are subject to a fine of not less than the amount designated ineba ter 46 , Part 18

TZI - Community Cat Management Jacksonville Florida

Documents

Transcript of TZI - Community Cat Management Jacksonville Florida