| Shelter Reform Action Committee (SRAC) ShelterReform.org: Everything you ever wanted to know about the AC&C, but were afraid to ask. |
| Shelter Reform Action Committee (SRAC) ShelterReform.org: Everything you ever wanted to know about the AC&C, but were afraid to ask. |
| Shelter Reform Action Committee (SRAC) ShelterReform.org: Everything you ever wanted to know about the AC&C, but were afraid to ask. |
| NYC's "MATRIX" is Not a Movie, but it is the Key to "No-Kill." That said, Why is NYC's MATRIX Being Kept a Top Secret? |
Over the past 8 years, the number of animals killed at the AC&C has steadily decreased while the
number of animals pulled by rescuers or adopted has steadily increased. That’s great news. These
numbers are due -- in overwhelming measure -- to the tireless efforts and financial sacrifices of rescue
groups. In turn, rescuers have been aided and organized by the Mayor’s Alliance. The Alliance’s work is,
in turn, fueled by a multi million dollar grant from Maddie’s Fund.
So, there’s plenty of credit to go around for those numbers being cited.
Over the past 8 years, NYC animal lovers have been told that our City is “on track” to “no-kill.” That
sounds great, too. However, Shelter Reform Action Committee (SRAC) is concerned that New Yorkers
are unaware of the specifics of how our City’s progress to “no-kill” is being measured and how we can
know when that goal is reached. Most people don’t understand that a “no-kill” shelter can continue to kill
certain animals if those animals are labeled in a particular way.
SRAC’s concerns about the public’s unfamiliarity with the “no-kill” concept were increased by two events:
 | A few months ago the AC&C announced (for the very first time) that it follows the ASILOMAR | |
| Accords. That statement went unnoticed, because very few people have even heard of ASILOMAR (as well as its key tool – a Pet Evaluation Matrix), much less understand ASILOMAR’ s central role to “no-kill.” |
| A rescue group recently asked us: “What difference does it make why AC&C kills an animal. It’s | |
| dead, right? Isn’t that all we need to know?” |
These two statements were a wake-up call for SRAC. Anyone who wants to see AC&C become a “no-kill”
shelter must understand what “no-kill” actually means. Otherwise, what’s to prevent someone from
declaring – today – that NYC is a “no-kill” community? Sounds fanciful? Not as long as there’s no
accountability and transparency in deciding which animals can be killed.
SRAC publishes this article in the hope that it will (a) educate our readers about “no-kill,” ASILOMAR and
MATRIX, (b) encourage the publication of New York City’s MATRIX, and (c) prompt the creation of a new
MATRIX.
“NO-KILL”
Maddie’s Fund is a non-profit charity that has committed $300 million to turn the U.S. into a “no-kill”
nation. Maddie’s defines “no-kill” as when “all healthy and treatable shelter dogs and cats are
guaranteed a loving home.”
For general definitions of “healthy” and “treatable”, we first turn to the ASILOMAR Accords.
ASILOMAR ACCORDS AND COMMUNITY STANDARD OF CARE
The ASILOMAR Accords (created in 2004 by a group of 21 leading U.S. animal welfare groups) provide a
statistical framework and a set of guiding principles for communities that wish to reduce the euthanasia of
“healthy or treatable dogs and cats.” The ASILOMAR Accords provide formulae to track a
community’s progress and compare it with other ASILOMAR communities.
ASILOMAR divides dogs and cats into 4 different categories of medical and/or behavioral conditions, and
the prognosis for each condition assuming the animal receives a “community standard of care.” That
care is defined as “typically provided to pets by reasonable and caring pet owners/guardians in the
community.” (It’s irrelevant if a shelter cannot provide that level of care. What’s important is if a
hypothetical community caregiver can.) In short, does an animal have a condition that requires a shelter
to kill it?
The 4 ASILOMAR categories of animals are:
| “treatable/rehabilitatable”: having medical and/or behavior conditions that can be reversed. |
| “treatable/manageable”: having medical and/or behavior conditions that can be managed, | |
| though not reversed. |
| “unhealthy/untreatable”: far too sick, too young, too behaviorally dangerous, or local law | |
| prohibits their being someone’s pet. These animals pose a “significant” risk to the health or safety of people or other animals. They do not fall into either the “healthy” or “treatable” columns. |
| “healthy”: “reasonably healthy and reasonably well-adjusted,” exhibiting none of the conditions | |
| that would place them in one of the above-listed categories. |
As in everything, the devil is in the details. What are the precise, detailed conditions assigned to the 4
ASILOMAR categories?
The answer lies in a community’s individualized Pet Evaluation Matrix.
PET EVALUATION MATRIX
“A matrix is the next step in developing accountability and transparency. When published with
definitions and community statistics, a matrix (and an explanation of how it was created) gives shelters
and the public a much better picture of where they've come from, where they're at and where they must
go to reach their lifesaving goals. “ (Emphasis added). Read More at http://www.maddiesfund.
org/resource_library/what_is_a_treatable_shelter_pet_editorial.htm
A Matrix is a detailed list of all the behavioral and medical conditions commonly seen in the community’s
shelter dogs and cats, and a judgment as to prognosis for each condition.
Maddie’s describes how a Matrix should be created:
| Convene an advisory panel to create a draft Matrix | |
| Distribute the draft widely to community “stakeholders” | |
| Panel reviews the comments and finalizes the Matrix. | |
| Panel publishes the Matrix. |
Maddie’s stresses that “public participation is critical to maintaining transparency and achieving
.
SAMPLES OF MATRICES
Maddie’s has published matrices created by different Maddie’s grantee-communities. The communities
describe how they went about creating their individual matrices.
Maddie’s has recently published a sample matrix for use by communities that cannot afford to create their
own.
The No Kill Advocacy Center has also proposed its own matrix.
While there can often be a wide variance among all these matrices, they share one trait in common:
specificity. Each behavior or medical condition assigned to an ASILOMAR category is clearly
identified. There is no vagueness about whether a condition makes an animal “healthy,”
“treatable/rehabilitatable,” “treatable/manageable,” or “unhealthy/untreatable.” We must always keep in
mind that a shelter can kill “unhealthy/untreatable” animals and still claim to be a “no-kill” shelter.
NYC’S MATRIX
How does NYC’s Matrix compare with other matrices?
SRAC can’t answer that question, because we couldn’t find a copy of NYC’s Matrix.
Presumably a Matrix exists. Every year, AC&C’s progress is reported to Maddie’s Fund in ASILOMAR
form.
SRAC’s interest in NYC’s Matrix is not merely academic. In 2015, the Maddie’s grant requires that AC&C
be “no-kill.” This means that come 2015, AC&C can never again kill another “healthy” or “treatable”
animal. However, if there’s no detailed list of specific conditions that make an animal “healthy” or
“treatable,” what prevents someone from declaring … TODAY … that NYC is “no-kill”? Simply claim that
every animal killed was “unhealthy/untreatable,” and who will be the wiser?
LET’S MAKE NYC’S MATRIX OPEN AND TRANSPARENT
SRAC hopes this article will encourage publication of the existing Matrix, and the creation of a new one
created by NYC’s “stakeholders.”
Creating a new Matrix will be an important step towards ensuring accountability and transparency.
However, a Matrix doesn’t ensure that AC&C animals will be properly categorized as healthy, treatable, or
untreatable. AC&C employees must be qualified to properly assess each shelter animal’s condition
(medical and behavior). Through the years, the AC&C has always done a disgracefully poor job of that.
We have to change that.
The issue of properly identifying medical and behavioral conditions will be the subject of a future article.
For now, however, SRAC requests the publication of the existing Matrix and the creation of a new one.
That is step one.
Rich Avanzino, President of Maddie's Fund
