--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following is the complete text of the 1998 evaluation of the Center for Animal Care and Control by the Humane
Society of the United States [Part 8].
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FIELD SERVICES/ANIMAL CONTROL
General Overview
Serving a population of 7.3 million, the CACC has eight employees actually in the field answering any and all requests
for service. The national average number of field officers recommended by the National Animal Control Association is
one officer per 16,000 to 18,000 persons. At CACC, there is one officer (rescue driver) per approximately one million
persons.
The CACC mission emphasizes animal rescue; however, the hours of field service are currently Monday through Friday,
8:00 A.M. to 8:00 P.M., with little budget for overtime and, according to CACC employees, no budget for additional hours
for field service coverage. The average daily number of incoming calls at CACC dispatch is 200 calls; those calls
needing field service response average at least 150 calls with the actual number responded to being approximately only
75. This indicates that CACC is able to respond to only about half of the number of requests for animal rescue,
prioritized by type. With no other agency to fill the void, this can result in animal suffering when calls are not responded
to. Half of the field drivers start at 8:00 A.M., the other half at noon. At 8:00 A.M., all drivers fuel up their vehicles at the
same time, resulting in a back log at the pumps.
The starting salary for a field service rescue driver is approximately $17,000 which is disproportionate with the
responsibilities and risks involved in the job (as well as the cost of living in NYC). In addition, there are extremely limited
after hours provision for animal rescue response, which, according to CACC employees, is due to budget constraints.
Recommendation: A professional animal care and control program protects animals and people alike, and improves the
quality of life in a community. An organized program is within the reach of any community, large or small. To be
successful, however, it must be a formal program with sufficient budgetary allocations, managed by a competent,
professional staff.
CACC is seriously understaffed to handle the demand for field service for which it is responsible. Currently, staff are
only able to handle approximately 50% of all incoming calls, and is not yet responsible for handling dangerous animal
concerns of threat to public safety. There should be enough rescue driver (animal control officer) positions to provide
24 hour a day/7 days a week/365 days a year service to accomplish the CACC mission.
During busy times there should be at least two animal control officers (rescue drivers) for each borough to respond
effectively and in a timely manner to the nature of the requests for service that come into this agency. The shifts should
be staggered to reduce down time at the beginning of each shift; in addition, drivers should be fueling up at the end of
their shifts to improve response time during the busy part of the day, which is mornings.
CACC should enter into a formal agreement with NYPD for after hours emergency calls, including police escorts when
necessary for safety. CACC should also establish a policy that all emergency calls will be responded to and budget for
the inevitable overtime. As far as the starting salary for the field officers, CACC's Executive Director and Human
Resources staff could gather national statistics as well as CACC statistics to justify the need to the CACC Board of
Directors.
The National Animal Control Association's Training Manual states the following:
Field services is ineffective if only utilized as a pick up service. Agencies must go beyond that to become a viable
program of animal control and rescue that contributes to community education. When properly conducted, the program
can win public support for and compliance with the total program. In effective and humane field services, personnel carry
out these duties:
Enforcement of all licensing and permits for state & local laws
Impoundment of unlicensed animals running at large and issuance of violation notices for licensed animals running at
large
Issuance of citations
Patrolling community on a regular schedule to help make public aware and enforce laws
Inspection of commercial animal establishments and other premises required to have permits
Investigation of cruelty cases and handling of all animal welfare related cases
Rescue of animals in danger or distress
Investigation of bite and nuisance cases
Animal control officers should wear uniforms and have training, trained personnel being the most effective, basic
ingredient to a viable, professional animal control program. The need for training can be seen by comparing your
programs effectiveness to complaints or praise you receive, thereby measuring the response of your community. The
highly trained professional you have as your representative will win higher credibility and respect for your program./60
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FN60/ National Animal Control Association Training Manual, 1997.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Communications/Dispatch
CACC has its own radio frequency communicating from CACC dispatch base station to the Animal Rescue trucks and
from vehicle to vehicle. Radio communication is the only form of communication between the dispatchers and the rescue
drivers. For the most part radio transmission is clear and audible but there are some areas or localities in which radio
communication is not possible (due to dead air space or other technical problems). Radio communication at CACC is
primarily by normal conversation; the use of ten codes and signal codes is limited, which may be due to the fact that
most of the CACC field staff has had little or no formal radio communication training.
There is cross training between the animal rescue drivers and dispatchers; all of the rescue drivers can dispatch and
some of the dispatchers can go into the field and rescue animals on a limited basis. Dispatchers prioritize incoming calls
according to emergency status; the priority of the calls is "common knowledge" but nowhere has this information been
placed in writing. According to rescue drivers, incoming calls are generally easy to prioritize; however, if a complainant
calls in repeatedly, the dispatchers may increase the priority. Additionally, rescue drivers stated that there is a lack of
consistency among dispatchers as to the priority of police requests for assistance. Both of these examples cause friction
and discontent among the field staff.
As calls (requests for services) come into dispatching, generally, the dispatchers hand write the necessary information
on a piece of paper and place it into a rescue driver's box. At a later time, the call is entered into the computer and a
background check done. A problem exists when the driver responds prior to the background check and the driver is
unfamiliar with the location---drivers are then not provided with all available information when responding to a complaint
or request for service. In addition, this results in a duplication of information in the computer records.
A new computer program has been installed and understandably will take some time to become familiar to employees.
However, the failure to alert rescue drivers of potentially dangerous dogs or violent owners could become a safety issue
for the driver.
Another safety issue between dispatch and the drivers is the fact that the drivers do not routinely notify dispatch upon
arrival of the scene and exit of their vehicles. This is especially hazardous due to the fact that the rescue drivers do not
carry portable radios to communicate when they need assistance or are in danger.
According to the dispatch supervisor, approximately 30% of requests for service involve wildlife needs. While the CACC
contract does not address or budget for the care of wildlife, there is no other agency routinely responding to wildlife
complaints. As a result, citizens call CACC and CACC assumes this responsibility. (See also "WILDLIFE AND
EXOTICS--Wildlife Care and Handling").
CACC rents humane traps to citizens with wildlife problems, frequently having to deliver traps to those unable to pick up
the trap at a CACC facility. Then, the rescue drivers must return to impound the animals caught in the traps. Many
nuisance wildlife calls require the removal of more than one animal. CACC drivers respond to trapped wildlife calls by
impounding both the animal and the trap, returning both to a shelter, rather than safely transferring the animal into a
carrier (in the field), and re setting the trap for additional animals at the same location. This current practice requires the
drivers to make unnecessary trips back to the same locations to return the trap to be reset.
Recommendations: Rescue driver safety depends upon reliable means of communication. CACC should provide
professional radio communication training for all dispatchers and rescue drivers to improve communication and
professionalism. In addition, an alternate means of communication should be provided to rescue drivers to insure driver
communication with CACC dispatch and/or police. CACC should investigate the possibility of obtaining discarded or
replaced radio equipment from NYPD, and explore the possibility of utilizing pagers and cellular phones.
Standards should be established for prioritizing requests for service and post these in dispatch area as well as in a
policy and procedure Manual. With few exceptions, police request for assistance should be given high priority, or
immediate response, much the same as CACC rescue driver request for police assistance. This should be addressed at
ongoing meetings between CACC and NYPD.
As far as the current practice of handwriting calls as they come in, rather than immediately entering them into the
computer, dispatchers should be given incentives to encourage them to become proficient in the new computer program.
CACC management should investigate whether or not there exists a serious problem with a backlog of incoming phone
calls. If one does indeed exist, CACC should examine the possibility of adding an additional phone line and a part time
employee to assist during the busiest part of the day. In the event of a citizen calling in repeatedly for response to a
nonpriority service request, the supervisor of dispatch should handle the situation by explaining the priority system.
For safety reasons, it should be mandatory that rescue drivers notify dispatch of their location whenever they exit their
vehicles. A standard time limit (approximately 15 - 30 minutes) should be established for a driver to be out on a call
before dispatchers become concerned and send assistance. (There is a loose policy like this at CACC which is not
enforced by supervisors) The drivers, in turn, should be expected to check in with dispatchers prior to that time frame to
indicate their well being.
As traps are replaced at CACC, newly purchased traps should be a type which allows for the safe transfer of trapped
animals from a trap into a similarly designed carrier. This will save substantial time in unnecessary travel to return traps
to problem locations
Wildlife issues will need to be addressed by the CACC Board with the City of New York and appropriate funding
received. In addition, efforts should continue in conjunction with recommendations from the Inter-Agency Task Force
that has been established to address the needs of wildlife within all of the City's boroughs.
After-hours Procedures
If a citizen calls CACC after hours, he receives a recorded message providing CACC hours, bite information, location of
Manhattan shelter, and a phone number for additional information. There are veterinary technicians on duty 24-hours a
day at the Manhattan shelter for five days a week, and the other two days until midnight.
Presently, the supervisor of dispatch takes home the only portable radio as well as a pager. The supervisor receives
after hours request for service from either Poison Control, Dept. Of Health, or the Mayors office, evaluates the situation,
and determines whether or not CACC will respond. If a response is necessary, the emergency on-call rescue driver is
paged and dispatched to the scene. Injured animals are taken to the Manhattan CACC shelter.
A rescue driver is on-call for a period of three months and receives an extra $75 per week plus time and a half (for each
call out) compensation. The on-call rescue driver responds with only the truck radio as a means of communication. If he
has difficulty locating the scene or needs assistance he must reach the supervisor by radio, who in turn must contact the
requesting agency for additional information.
Recommendations: Three months on-call is a considerably long time period, considering the rescue driver is expected
to report to work for his normal shift even if he had been called out during the previous night (often more than once).
To minimize this stress, a weekly on-call assignment is common practice for animal control agencies nationally. However,
the problem of after hours calls may be solved by implementing actual night shifts and assigning those rescue drivers'
additional duties (such as computer data input) to make up for any reduction in the number of calls received.
Professionally trained (certified) veterinary technicians are qualified to assess vital signs on severely injured or suffering
animals brought in after hours, and there should be veterinary technicians on duty 24 hours a day, seven days a week
to accomplish this.
Special Patrolman Status
CACC Special Patrolmen are rescue drivers who have undergone extensive training and are authorized to issue civil
citations regarding animals. According to the Director of Operations, the training involved is provided by the city and
takes place over several months. There is no requirement for rescue drivers to attain this training and many choose not
to attend for various reasons, primarily the length of time it takes to undergo training and the difficulty of the curriculum.
There is a monetary (salary) incentive for accomplishing this status as the salary increases from $17,000 to $25,000.
Some of the rescue drivers indicated that they do not want the responsibility of issuing citations as they fear owner
retaliation, especially since they do not carry weapons and do not have the same respect as police from the general
public.
Recommendations: CACC management should strive to set the highest standards possible for rescue drivers, and
establish a job requirement for all newly hired rescue drivers to attain Special Patrolman status within first year of hire.
The HSUS strongly recommends that CACC considers changing the job title of "Rescue Driver" to "Animal Control
Officer" to reflect additional responsibilities. Field services is ineffective if only a reactive service. Public education
through warnings and citations is an important component of an effective animal control program. In addition, the term
"Special Patrolman" should be modified to "Special Patrol Officer" to eliminate any perceived gender bias.
Job Descriptions and Procedure Manuals
Presently there are no formal (written) job descriptions or policy and procedure manuals for Field Services staff of
CACC, although the chief veterinarian is overseeing the revision of the current policies and procedures manual which
will encompass all CACC departments.
There is some confusion among staff as to what actually needs to be covered during training and who is responsible for
what duties, as there is a variance in interpretation of verbal job descriptions. Currently, new procedures are verbally
passed from supervisors to employees, written protocol seldom being implemented. There is occasional lack of
communication or misunderstanding by some employees who may not be on duty when the initial change is made.
Recommendations: The Director of Operations (and the Director of Field Services if this position is filled) should be
primarily responsible for the portion of CACC Policy and Procedure Manual relating to Field Services.
In addition, employees should have considerable input into both their job descriptions as well as the procedures portion
of CACC Policy and Procedure Manual. This improves employee morale as well as giving insight as to what the
employees are actually "doing" and how they perceive their positions or roles in the organization.
New procedures should be written and distributed to all affected employees as soon as changes occur, as well as a
follow up by immediate supervisors to insure understanding. A training meeting is also an excellent way to communicate
any proposed changes, as the employees may have insight to potential problems with a new procedure.
Training
Currently, newly hired CACC field staff are trained on the job with little or no formal or professional class room training.
For example, if a newly hired rescue driver has little experience handling animals, this employee works two weeks in the
CACC kennels. After this, the employee accompanies an experienced rescue driver in the field for one to two weeks.
There are currently no training logs or records documenting the progress of the employee. CACC field staffs do, on
occasion, have field service meetings; however, due to staff shortages and the demand for service in the field, it is
common for the rescue drivers to miss these meetings.
Rarely are there training meetings which involve outside professionals coming to CACC to instruct field staff on pertinent
issues. Special Patrolmen in training attend numerous classes arranged by the Environmental Control Board at various
locations within the city. Some of the supervisors have attended outside professional training but only on limited basis.
Recommendations: A formal training program should be established for both rescue drivers and dispatchers. Outside
professional trainers and classes should be included as part of the field services budget. A training schedule to
document progress of employees, including date of completion of each required task, should be utilized for all field staff.
Enforcement Procedures
Impoundment is the primary enforcement tool of CACC field programs. There are escalating fees for repeat offenders,
as well as civil citations which may be issued by Special Patrolmen.
Notices of impoundment are seldom left at the location of owners of impounded animals. The reason for this seems
somewhat unclear, but employees stated that "rarely will anyone admit they know who owns the animal" and, again, due
to time and parking restrictions, employees feel that it is impractical to search for an owner location to leave written
notices. According to CACC employees, there is little emphasis by management to leave notices at possible owner
locations.
The Department of Environmental Control is the agency which oversees civil citations, and failure to respond to. A
citation may result in a summons being issued. Citations, however, are only occasionally issued to pet owners. For the
most part, this is due to the fact that employees believe those issuing citations without wearing a weapon is dangerous
(especially after dark) and many fear retaliation from defendants.
Approximately 30 cases of animal related violations are filed in NYC court system each year. More than 85% of those
cases are removed without action. 5% - 10% are prosecuted and only 3% reach a conviction. On occasion, a special
unit of the NYPD asks CACC rescue drivers to assist them in "Special Sweeps." The police officers and CACC
employees go door to door in areas with reported aggressive dog problems. If there are any violations observed, dogs
are impounded. The supervisor of dispatch at CACC stated that she does have the option of denying NYPD Special
Sweep officers assistance, if CACC rescue drivers are too busy with other calls.
Recommendation: There must be increased emphasis on returning pets to owners, starting with CACC rescue drivers. It
should be standard policy that reuniting pets with owners is of paramount importance. A standard form (Notice of
Impoundment) should be designed, notifying possible owners that their pet was impounded. This form should include the
time and date of impoundment, the holding time limit, location and hours of the animal shelter the animal was taken to,
and fees and/or penalties involved.
If an owner is located, rescue drivers should contact CACC dispatch, who in turn should check computer records for any
prior complaints. First time offenders should be educated and/or issued citations and the pet returned off the truck. This
procedure may be cumbersome at first but can be an excellent public relations tool, emphasizing owner education (and,
hopefully, prevention of future problems) rather than strictly impounding animals.
Forms and Record Keeping
Overall, the CACC standard forms relating to field services are adequate; but there is room for improvement in several
of the forms. Examples of areas that could be modified to improve operations include:
The rabies vaccination form has no space for owner phone numbers or whether or not the animal is sterilized.
The application for dog license asks only if the dog was vaccinated with a check off box for yes or no; there is no space
for date of rabies vaccination and expiration nor for veterinarian or veterinary clinic information.
The animal bite report lacks spaces to note whether or not the animal is neutered, the animal's name, the animal's
behavior (normal or abnormal), whether or not the animal is vaccinated and an expiration date of vaccination, the
veterinarian or clinic where the animal was vaccinated, location of quarantine, parent information of minors, previous
history of bites by same animal, as well as final disposition of animal at the end of quarantine. (Although there are a few
lines for CACC and DoH official use only which may serve for disposition information.)
The daily rescue report lacks spaces for the following information: starting mileage, vehicle number, and fuel/fluid
information, activity number of service requests, action taken or investigation information, animal receipt number, times
for going in service, out on location for each call, time out of service at the shelter, total time worked for that shift.
The route sheet ,which indicates animal receipt number and the address of impoundment, has too little space for
remarks or actions taken.
The citation form lacks space for defendants phone numbers.
The police intake form lacks spaces for location of impoundment, description of the animal, animal's temperament or
behavior, whether or not the animal is injured or was chemically immobilized, at what time it was chemically immobilized
and with how much drug, as well as who did the actual sedating of the animal, and any witnesses for follow up
investigation.
There is no official notice of impoundment form to notify possible owners that their animal may have been impounded
and how to reclaim their animal.
Recommendation: Create or design an official notice of impoundment to promote reuniting owners with pets. Improve
other forms by adding above information that is lacking on each form, with the exception of the daily rescue report and
drivers route sheet which can be combined into one form.
Equipment
Uniforms of CACC employees appear semi-professional. The polo type shirts are appropriate for animal control
employees; however, many of the employees were somewhat disheveled in their appearance (such as shirts hanging
out, wrinkled clothing, as well as well worn pants and shoes).
The supervisors appeared somewhat casual in their appearance. The name badges of the employees are laminated
photo identification badges that are worn around the neck with the information displayed sideways in a manner that is
difficult to read. Some of the employees did not wear identification.
The animal rescue vehicles are late model vans modified with Mavron® company caging that is accessible from the
inside. These vehicles are quite sufficient for animal control work, and are equipped with climate controlled ventilation
(both heating and air conditioning). The employees feel that the ventilation system adequately heats and cools
throughout the vehicle.
CACC has a total of twelve vehicles, eight of which are used for actual animal rescues. Three are used for transport of
animals from CACC receiving centers, and one is used for delivery of spay/neuter animals to clinics in Manhattan or
Brooklyn, as well as interoffice courier service and delivery of wild animals to rehabilitators. Dead animals are not
transported in CACC vehicles with the exception of rabies suspects, which are placed into garbage bags. According to
CACC rescue drivers, vehicle cages are cleaned and disinfected after each use.
Some (but not all) of the rescue drivers have animal stretchers on board to transport injured animals, and some rescue
drivers indicated that they preferred not to use stretchers. When asked how they transported injured animals to and
from the vehicle, the response was to muzzle and carry them.
Rescue drivers are given equipment on an as needed basis, but there is no formal procedure for issuance of
equipment, such as documentation by supervisor or signing for equipment by employees. All rescue drivers were
equipped with capture poles, ropes or leashes, and most had cat graspers or tongs. Some rescue drivers had heavy
duty leather gloves.
CACC employees who were questioned about chemical capture were all in favor of CACC employees being formally
trained and responsible for this service. Most replied that they felt NYPD was often too quick to sedate dogs and that
CACC employees would be able to restrain many of those dogs without chemical capture. In addition, CACC employees
expressed interest in the use of blow pipes rather than guns for the administration of chemical capture due to the
reduced impact of the dart and the silence of the delivery system.
Humane live traps are commonly used by CACC employees to capture nuisance wildlife and cats, as well as an
occasional dog. On rare occasions, CACC employees respond to requests for euthanasia as a service to individuals
with no other means of transport. There is a fee for this service and it appears that providing this service on a rare
occasion is not a problem for CACC; in fact, according to many CACC employees they are happy to provide this service
to many elderly or infirm citizens.
There are two employees whose job duties include the delivery of animals from receiving centers and to and from
spay/neuter clinics, as well as provide courier services between the CACC facilities.
Recommendations: Supervisors should hold themselves and their employees to the highest standard of appearance
and should insist that employees present themselves to the public in the most professional manner possible. Uniforms
and appearance should be revisited in an effort to improve public perception. Badges and agency patches on a neatly
pressed uniform enhances the professionalism of the field staff and improve public respect. Name badges should be
provided that are easily read by the public, including the name and title of the employee.
The CACC vehicles could be improved by adding holding compartments for ropes, leashes, gloves, disinfectant, etc.,
which could be attached to the inside of the doors. Rescue drivers should be assigned equipment for which they must
sign for and thus, become responsible for, to minimize loss of equipment and provide for accountability by that employee.
To facilitate responsible animal capture and control, we recommend that each vehicle contain the following minimum
equipment:
Capture gloves - These can be of critical importance to humans in preventing injuries to animals and ensure they are
handled humanely. Gloves are a wise investment, and should be sized to fit snugly, be made of a penetration-resistant
material, and be lined with a puncture-resistant material. Welders gloves, which are similar in design, do not offer the
needed protection and only offer a false sense of security. The capture gloves are available from several companies in
various price ranges.
Leashes - Leashes can serve many purposes, and trucks should be well-stocked. A number of manufacturers offer
nylon leashes at a nominal price.
Crates -many sizes and types of crates should always be kept on board for a variety of situations.
Cardboard Carriers - These, too, can be used for a variety of purposes, including the transportation of diseased or
dead animals.
Nets - Nets are an essential piece of equipment which can enable field staff to handle a variety of animals with minimal
restraint. Nets should be sturdy, at least twice as deep as the diameter, and flat on the end, not round.
Stretcher - Most animal stretchers have plastic or vinyl covers designed to help immobilize injured animals. The cover
fits over the prone animal and attaches to the stretcher with a securing material, such as Velcro.
Halters and lead ropes - These items should be carried in every field truck in cases of livestock rescue or confiscation.
Cameras- Both Polaroid and 35-mm cameras should be available in each vehicle for documenting animal-cruelty cases,
and for use in any situation where an animal's condition should be documented. At least one camcorder for the agency
is also crucial for documenting cruelty cases.
Wire and bolt cutters - Instruments may be needed in the field to remove tight collars or chains. Wire and bolt cutters
should be available to assist in animal confiscations or rescues. Cutters should be strong enough to cut through a one
quarter inch chain.
Flashlight - Flashlights should be available in all animal control vehicles. Industrial flashlights with industrial metal
casings for use in inclement weather are recommended.
First Aid Kits (for both animals and humans) - In assembling or updating a first aid kit, agencies should consult with its
insurance carrier, the American Red Cross, and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Kits should include
rubber gloves, goggles, and other recommended items.
Live traps -Traps should be on board for use in situations involving difficult capture. Commonly carried sizes for onboard
vehicles range from the small (squirrel) to medium (raccoon). At least one large trap (dog) should be available for
agency use.
As traps are replaced new traps should be purchased which allow for the safe transfer of trapped animals into carriers
designed to compliment the traps. Every rescue vehicle should have an emergency stretcher on board and all rescue
drivers should be instructed to utilize these, not only for the most humane transport of injured animals but for the safety
of the rescue drivers, as well.
Licensing
CACC shelters provide dog license applications and forward those onto the Department of Health (DoH). CACC
employees report that citizens inform them that there is a four to five month delay from the time they apply for the
license to the time they actually receive the tag.
According to CACC staff, local veterinarians who express an interest also provide license applications. Pet stores must
by law provide license applications to those people who purchase dogs from their business. The ASPCA also provides
applications to people who adopt dogs from their organization. There is no monetary incentive for agencies to provide
license applications, and all issuing of licenses is done by DoH and not the agencies where forms are located.
The Department of Health processes license applications, having to follow up and insure that those applying for licenses
have their dogs currently vaccinated. There is no licensing for cats in New York City, although the Department of Health
would have the most accurate records to prove that cats are more likely to come in contact with rabid wild animals AND
transmit rabies to people. Granted, cats are required to be vaccinated against rabies, and they are also required to
wear owner identification. Therefore it is unclear as to why there is no requirement for cats to be licensed as the
standard means of identification, as well as proof of rabies vaccination. This would be an additional source of revenue
for the issuing agency.
As part of the recent audit by the Office of the Comptroller, they were asked to investigate whether or not donations that
had been included with dog license applications received by DoH were being forwarded to CACC. In addition, the
auditing agency surveyed a number of donors, asking where they had intended their money to be used.
"DoH solicits donations from the public when it renews or issues dog licenses. DoH received donations totaling $43,108
in 1996 and $33,596 in 1997. According to DoH officials, these donations were not specifically designated for any
animal care and control program. Instead, the donations were deposited in the City's General Fund. However, we found
that most dog owners who made donations to DoH expected that their donations would be designated for animal care.
During our review, we noted that DoH's 1995 dog license renewal application requested donations for animal control
programs. Specifically, the form states: "You may continue to help support NYC's animal control programs by including
your donation with your license fee payment." This statement was not imprinted on DoH's 1996 or 1997 dog license
applications.
While the 1996 and 1997 dog license applications do not indicate how donations will be used by DoH, we found that
most dog owners are under the impression that their donations would be used to fund the City's animal care and control
efforts. Specifically, 68 of the 100 dog owners surveyed stated that they expected their donations to be used for animal
care and control programs. Thirty one of the dog owners surveyed indicated that they did not have a specific recipient in
mind for their donations. Only one of the dog owners surveyed indicated that he wanted his donation to go to DoH.
It should be noted that it is legal for DoH to deposit donations from dog owners into the City's General Fund. However,
given the results of our survey, we believe that it would be more appropriate for DoH to designate these funds for animal
care and control. Alternatively, DoH should make sure donors know that donated funds are for DoH/City, not CACC.
Auditor's Recommendation: DoH should forward to CACC all private donations received with dog license applications. If
DoH decides not to forward the donations, DoH should include a statement on the dog license applications indicating
that the donated funds are for DoH/City, not CACC.
DoH's Response: In response to this recommendation, DoH stated: we have taken alternative action. Effective February
4, 1998, the DoH Bureau of Veterinary Public Health Services has deleted the word 'DONATION' from all dog license
applications sent out. When new applications are printed, this correction will be made. Therefore, it will not be necessary
to include the statement suggested by the auditors."/61
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FN61/ Audit Report on the Financial Practices of the Center for Animal Care and Control; City of New York Office of the
Comptroller, Bureau of Financial Audit, FM98-093A, June, 1998.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, the auditors were asked to evaluate whether CACC staff was requiring adopters to purchase dog licenses at
the time of adoption (which is a provision of CACC's contract):
We found that CACC does not require its customers to submit applications and to pay the related dog licenses fees
when they adopt dogs from CACC. Thus, CACC is not in compliance with the Fourth Amendment of its contract, which
became effective January 1, 1997. Specifically, the Fourth Amendment states that CACC:
". . . shall require each person adopting a dog to submit a dog license application and pay all required dog licensing
fees . . ·
CACC did not adhere to this provision of the contract, during calendar year 1997. However, it should be noted that at
our exit conference on May 20, 1998, CACC officials stated that although the Fourth Amendment indicates a January 1,
1997 effective date, they did not sign the Amendment until July 3, 1997. Thus, CACC contends that they did not know
about this requirement until July 3, 1997. Assuming CACC was required to adhere to this provision retroactively to
January 1997, CACC inappropriately allowed individuals to adopt 3,649 unlicensed dogs from the shelter facilities. It
should also be noted that the related fees, if collected by CACC, would have amounted to approximately $31,000.
Assuming CACC was not required to adhere to this provision until July 3, 1997, CACC inappropriately allowed
individuals to adopt 1,775 unlicensed dogs from the shelter facilities and failed to collect $15,087.
City dog licensing requirements were established to provide for the licensing and identification of dogs, and for the
control and protection of the dog population. In this connection, CACC needs to make every effort to ensure that all
individuals file dog license applications before they are allowed to adopt dogs from the shelter facilities. This
requirement will help ensure that these dogs, if they are ever lost, can be returned to their rightful owners, which could
ultimately reduce the number of stray animals in New York City.
Auditors Recommendation: CACC should ensure that all shelter personnel require individuals adopting dogs to submit
applications for dog licenses, in accordance with CACC's contract.
Auditee's and DoH's Responses: CACC officials agreed and stated: "The application materials and the waiver forms
were not supplied to CACC by the Department (NYC DoH) until April 30, 1998 . . . . Currently CACC, after receiving the
materials from DoH on April 30,1998, has written a corporate protocol and has scheduled a meeting with shelter staff
(May 28, 1998) to discuss and finalize the procedures. CACC intends to implement a procedure, in compliance with
contract requirements, in June 1998."
In its response, DoH stated that it 'will be monitoring CACC's and pet shops' sales of dog licenses as of July 1, 1998."
Auditors' Comments: Given the importance of the City's dog licensing requirements, we are surprised that it took DoH
nearly 11 months to provide CACC with the application materials and waiver forms. This delay resulted in CACC allowing
individuals to adopt 3,649 unlicensed dogs from the shelter facilities. In any case, we strongly recommend that DoH work
closely with CACC officials to ensure that all individuals submit dog license applications with the related fees to CACC
before they are allowed to adopt any dogs from the shelter facilities./62
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FN62/ Audit Report on the Financial Practices of the Center for Animal Care and Control; City of New York Office of the
Comptroller, Bureau of Financial Audit, FM98-093A, June, 1998.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to CACC and Department of Health staff, in a city of 7.3 million with an estimated pet population of at least two
million, there has been consistently only around 120,000 dog licenses issued per year by the Dept. Of Health over the
past several years.
Recommendations: The current structure for licensing compliance is difficult for pet owners to achieve. In addition, the
turn around time to receive a license from the DoH can be several months after a citizen has sent in the necessary fee.
Clearly, revenue will be lost by the recent removal of a"donation" option on the current licensing application.
The licensing program as it currently operates is only collecting a small portion of the potential funds it could, if it were
properly managed. Additionally, the CACC currently only receives $1.00 for every license issued, with the remainder
retained by the Department of Health. If this licensing program were coordinated through CACC to send out renewal
notices utilizing the Chameleon® software, then animal control staff could follow up with pet owners who do not comply
via mailer or random on site visits. Compliance could increase significantly, as well as the revenue generated which
could be used to offset the cost of providing animal control services.
Consider a theoretical calculation based on an estimated pet population of two million, with a 50% compliance rate, or
one million licenses sold. Take into account the city's progressive differential fee licensing program in place which
requires a $5.00 fee to be paid for sterilized pets and a $25.00 fee for intact pets. Further estimate for the purpose of
this illustration that licenses were divided equally between sterilized and intact animals, the revenue generated could
amount to approximately $15 million per year -- an estimated two and one half times the current operating budget for
CACC.
CACC should investigate the possibility of taking over the responsibility of issuing pet licensing. Generally, it is the
responsibility of the local animal control agency to assume the responsibility of licensing of dogs and cats, as that
agency has a vested interest in the identification of pets. CACC would benefit not only from the additional revenue
obtained, but from the additional information for their records, since it is ultimately responsible for enforcement.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following is the complete text of the 1998 evaluation of the Center for Animal Care and Control by the Humane
Society of the United States [Part 8].
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FIELD SERVICES/ANIMAL CONTROL
General Overview
Serving a population of 7.3 million, the CACC has eight employees actually in the field answering any and all requests
for service. The national average number of field officers recommended by the National Animal Control Association is
one officer per 16,000 to 18,000 persons. At CACC, there is one officer (rescue driver) per approximately one million
persons.
The CACC mission emphasizes animal rescue; however, the hours of field service are currently Monday through Friday,
8:00 A.M. to 8:00 P.M., with little budget for overtime and, according to CACC employees, no budget for additional hours
for field service coverage. The average daily number of incoming calls at CACC dispatch is 200 calls; those calls
needing field service response average at least 150 calls with the actual number responded to being approximately only
75. This indicates that CACC is able to respond to only about half of the number of requests for animal rescue,
prioritized by type. With no other agency to fill the void, this can result in animal suffering when calls are not responded
to. Half of the field drivers start at 8:00 A.M., the other half at noon. At 8:00 A.M., all drivers fuel up their vehicles at the
same time, resulting in a back log at the pumps.
The starting salary for a field service rescue driver is approximately $17,000 which is disproportionate with the
responsibilities and risks involved in the job (as well as the cost of living in NYC). In addition, there are extremely limited
after hours provision for animal rescue response, which, according to CACC employees, is due to budget constraints.
Recommendation: A professional animal care and control program protects animals and people alike, and improves the
quality of life in a community. An organized program is within the reach of any community, large or small. To be
successful, however, it must be a formal program with sufficient budgetary allocations, managed by a competent,
professional staff.
CACC is seriously understaffed to handle the demand for field service for which it is responsible. Currently, staff are
only able to handle approximately 50% of all incoming calls, and is not yet responsible for handling dangerous animal
concerns of threat to public safety. There should be enough rescue driver (animal control officer) positions to provide
24 hour a day/7 days a week/365 days a year service to accomplish the CACC mission.
During busy times there should be at least two animal control officers (rescue drivers) for each borough to respond
effectively and in a timely manner to the nature of the requests for service that come into this agency. The shifts should
be staggered to reduce down time at the beginning of each shift; in addition, drivers should be fueling up at the end of
their shifts to improve response time during the busy part of the day, which is mornings.
CACC should enter into a formal agreement with NYPD for after hours emergency calls, including police escorts when
necessary for safety. CACC should also establish a policy that all emergency calls will be responded to and budget for
the inevitable overtime. As far as the starting salary for the field officers, CACC's Executive Director and Human
Resources staff could gather national statistics as well as CACC statistics to justify the need to the CACC Board of
Directors.
The National Animal Control Association's Training Manual states the following:
Field services is ineffective if only utilized as a pick up service. Agencies must go beyond that to become a viable
program of animal control and rescue that contributes to community education. When properly conducted, the program
can win public support for and compliance with the total program. In effective and humane field services, personnel carry
out these duties:
Enforcement of all licensing and permits for state & local laws
Impoundment of unlicensed animals running at large and issuance of violation notices for licensed animals running at
large
Issuance of citations
Patrolling community on a regular schedule to help make public aware and enforce laws
Inspection of commercial animal establishments and other premises required to have permits
Investigation of cruelty cases and handling of all animal welfare related cases
Rescue of animals in danger or distress
Investigation of bite and nuisance cases
Animal control officers should wear uniforms and have training, trained personnel being the most effective, basic
ingredient to a viable, professional animal control program. The need for training can be seen by comparing your
programs effectiveness to complaints or praise you receive, thereby measuring the response of your community. The
highly trained professional you have as your representative will win higher credibility and respect for your program./60
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FN60/ National Animal Control Association Training Manual, 1997.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Communications/Dispatch
CACC has its own radio frequency communicating from CACC dispatch base station to the Animal Rescue trucks and
from vehicle to vehicle. Radio communication is the only form of communication between the dispatchers and the rescue
drivers. For the most part radio transmission is clear and audible but there are some areas or localities in which radio
communication is not possible (due to dead air space or other technical problems). Radio communication at CACC is
primarily by normal conversation; the use of ten codes and signal codes is limited, which may be due to the fact that
most of the CACC field staff has had little or no formal radio communication training.
There is cross training between the animal rescue drivers and dispatchers; all of the rescue drivers can dispatch and
some of the dispatchers can go into the field and rescue animals on a limited basis. Dispatchers prioritize incoming calls
according to emergency status; the priority of the calls is "common knowledge" but nowhere has this information been
placed in writing. According to rescue drivers, incoming calls are generally easy to prioritize; however, if a complainant
calls in repeatedly, the dispatchers may increase the priority. Additionally, rescue drivers stated that there is a lack of
consistency among dispatchers as to the priority of police requests for assistance. Both of these examples cause friction
and discontent among the field staff.
As calls (requests for services) come into dispatching, generally, the dispatchers hand write the necessary information
on a piece of paper and place it into a rescue driver's box. At a later time, the call is entered into the computer and a
background check done. A problem exists when the driver responds prior to the background check and the driver is
unfamiliar with the location---drivers are then not provided with all available information when responding to a complaint
or request for service. In addition, this results in a duplication of information in the computer records.
A new computer program has been installed and understandably will take some time to become familiar to employees.
However, the failure to alert rescue drivers of potentially dangerous dogs or violent owners could become a safety issue
for the driver.
Another safety issue between dispatch and the drivers is the fact that the drivers do not routinely notify dispatch upon
arrival of the scene and exit of their vehicles. This is especially hazardous due to the fact that the rescue drivers do not
carry portable radios to communicate when they need assistance or are in danger.
According to the dispatch supervisor, approximately 30% of requests for service involve wildlife needs. While the CACC
contract does not address or budget for the care of wildlife, there is no other agency routinely responding to wildlife
complaints. As a result, citizens call CACC and CACC assumes this responsibility. (See also "WILDLIFE AND
EXOTICS--Wildlife Care and Handling").
CACC rents humane traps to citizens with wildlife problems, frequently having to deliver traps to those unable to pick up
the trap at a CACC facility. Then, the rescue drivers must return to impound the animals caught in the traps. Many
nuisance wildlife calls require the removal of more than one animal. CACC drivers respond to trapped wildlife calls by
impounding both the animal and the trap, returning both to a shelter, rather than safely transferring the animal into a
carrier (in the field), and re setting the trap for additional animals at the same location. This current practice requires the
drivers to make unnecessary trips back to the same locations to return the trap to be reset.
Recommendations: Rescue driver safety depends upon reliable means of communication. CACC should provide
professional radio communication training for all dispatchers and rescue drivers to improve communication and
professionalism. In addition, an alternate means of communication should be provided to rescue drivers to insure driver
communication with CACC dispatch and/or police. CACC should investigate the possibility of obtaining discarded or
replaced radio equipment from NYPD, and explore the possibility of utilizing pagers and cellular phones.
Standards should be established for prioritizing requests for service and post these in dispatch area as well as in a
policy and procedure Manual. With few exceptions, police request for assistance should be given high priority, or
immediate response, much the same as CACC rescue driver request for police assistance. This should be addressed at
ongoing meetings between CACC and NYPD.
As far as the current practice of handwriting calls as they come in, rather than immediately entering them into the
computer, dispatchers should be given incentives to encourage them to become proficient in the new computer program.
CACC management should investigate whether or not there exists a serious problem with a backlog of incoming phone
calls. If one does indeed exist, CACC should examine the possibility of adding an additional phone line and a part time
employee to assist during the busiest part of the day. In the event of a citizen calling in repeatedly for response to a
nonpriority service request, the supervisor of dispatch should handle the situation by explaining the priority system.
For safety reasons, it should be mandatory that rescue drivers notify dispatch of their location whenever they exit their
vehicles. A standard time limit (approximately 15 - 30 minutes) should be established for a driver to be out on a call
before dispatchers become concerned and send assistance. (There is a loose policy like this at CACC which is not
enforced by supervisors) The drivers, in turn, should be expected to check in with dispatchers prior to that time frame to
indicate their well being.
As traps are replaced at CACC, newly purchased traps should be a type which allows for the safe transfer of trapped
animals from a trap into a similarly designed carrier. This will save substantial time in unnecessary travel to return traps
to problem locations
Wildlife issues will need to be addressed by the CACC Board with the City of New York and appropriate funding
received. In addition, efforts should continue in conjunction with recommendations from the Inter-Agency Task Force
that has been established to address the needs of wildlife within all of the City's boroughs.
After-hours Procedures
If a citizen calls CACC after hours, he receives a recorded message providing CACC hours, bite information, location of
Manhattan shelter, and a phone number for additional information. There are veterinary technicians on duty 24-hours a
day at the Manhattan shelter for five days a week, and the other two days until midnight.
Presently, the supervisor of dispatch takes home the only portable radio as well as a pager. The supervisor receives
after hours request for service from either Poison Control, Dept. Of Health, or the Mayors office, evaluates the situation,
and determines whether or not CACC will respond. If a response is necessary, the emergency on-call rescue driver is
paged and dispatched to the scene. Injured animals are taken to the Manhattan CACC shelter.
A rescue driver is on-call for a period of three months and receives an extra $75 per week plus time and a half (for each
call out) compensation. The on-call rescue driver responds with only the truck radio as a means of communication. If he
has difficulty locating the scene or needs assistance he must reach the supervisor by radio, who in turn must contact the
requesting agency for additional information.
Recommendations: Three months on-call is a considerably long time period, considering the rescue driver is expected
to report to work for his normal shift even if he had been called out during the previous night (often more than once).
To minimize this stress, a weekly on-call assignment is common practice for animal control agencies nationally. However,
the problem of after hours calls may be solved by implementing actual night shifts and assigning those rescue drivers'
additional duties (such as computer data input) to make up for any reduction in the number of calls received.
Professionally trained (certified) veterinary technicians are qualified to assess vital signs on severely injured or suffering
animals brought in after hours, and there should be veterinary technicians on duty 24 hours a day, seven days a week
to accomplish this.
Special Patrolman Status
CACC Special Patrolmen are rescue drivers who have undergone extensive training and are authorized to issue civil
citations regarding animals. According to the Director of Operations, the training involved is provided by the city and
takes place over several months. There is no requirement for rescue drivers to attain this training and many choose not
to attend for various reasons, primarily the length of time it takes to undergo training and the difficulty of the curriculum.
There is a monetary (salary) incentive for accomplishing this status as the salary increases from $17,000 to $25,000.
Some of the rescue drivers indicated that they do not want the responsibility of issuing citations as they fear owner
retaliation, especially since they do not carry weapons and do not have the same respect as police from the general
public.
Recommendations: CACC management should strive to set the highest standards possible for rescue drivers, and
establish a job requirement for all newly hired rescue drivers to attain Special Patrolman status within first year of hire.
The HSUS strongly recommends that CACC considers changing the job title of "Rescue Driver" to "Animal Control
Officer" to reflect additional responsibilities. Field services is ineffective if only a reactive service. Public education
through warnings and citations is an important component of an effective animal control program. In addition, the term
"Special Patrolman" should be modified to "Special Patrol Officer" to eliminate any perceived gender bias.
Job Descriptions and Procedure Manuals
Presently there are no formal (written) job descriptions or policy and procedure manuals for Field Services staff of
CACC, although the chief veterinarian is overseeing the revision of the current policies and procedures manual which
will encompass all CACC departments.
There is some confusion among staff as to what actually needs to be covered during training and who is responsible for
what duties, as there is a variance in interpretation of verbal job descriptions. Currently, new procedures are verbally
passed from supervisors to employees, written protocol seldom being implemented. There is occasional lack of
communication or misunderstanding by some employees who may not be on duty when the initial change is made.
Recommendations: The Director of Operations (and the Director of Field Services if this position is filled) should be
primarily responsible for the portion of CACC Policy and Procedure Manual relating to Field Services.
In addition, employees should have considerable input into both their job descriptions as well as the procedures portion
of CACC Policy and Procedure Manual. This improves employee morale as well as giving insight as to what the
employees are actually "doing" and how they perceive their positions or roles in the organization.
New procedures should be written and distributed to all affected employees as soon as changes occur, as well as a
follow up by immediate supervisors to insure understanding. A training meeting is also an excellent way to communicate
any proposed changes, as the employees may have insight to potential problems with a new procedure.
Training
Currently, newly hired CACC field staff are trained on the job with little or no formal or professional class room training.
For example, if a newly hired rescue driver has little experience handling animals, this employee works two weeks in the
CACC kennels. After this, the employee accompanies an experienced rescue driver in the field for one to two weeks.
There are currently no training logs or records documenting the progress of the employee. CACC field staffs do, on
occasion, have field service meetings; however, due to staff shortages and the demand for service in the field, it is
common for the rescue drivers to miss these meetings.
Rarely are there training meetings which involve outside professionals coming to CACC to instruct field staff on pertinent
issues. Special Patrolmen in training attend numerous classes arranged by the Environmental Control Board at various
locations within the city. Some of the supervisors have attended outside professional training but only on limited basis.
Recommendations: A formal training program should be established for both rescue drivers and dispatchers. Outside
professional trainers and classes should be included as part of the field services budget. A training schedule to
document progress of employees, including date of completion of each required task, should be utilized for all field staff.
Enforcement Procedures
Impoundment is the primary enforcement tool of CACC field programs. There are escalating fees for repeat offenders,
as well as civil citations which may be issued by Special Patrolmen.
Notices of impoundment are seldom left at the location of owners of impounded animals. The reason for this seems
somewhat unclear, but employees stated that "rarely will anyone admit they know who owns the animal" and, again, due
to time and parking restrictions, employees feel that it is impractical to search for an owner location to leave written
notices. According to CACC employees, there is little emphasis by management to leave notices at possible owner
locations.
The Department of Environmental Control is the agency which oversees civil citations, and failure to respond to. A
citation may result in a summons being issued. Citations, however, are only occasionally issued to pet owners. For the
most part, this is due to the fact that employees believe those issuing citations without wearing a weapon is dangerous
(especially after dark) and many fear retaliation from defendants.
Approximately 30 cases of animal related violations are filed in NYC court system each year. More than 85% of those
cases are removed without action. 5% - 10% are prosecuted and only 3% reach a conviction. On occasion, a special
unit of the NYPD asks CACC rescue drivers to assist them in "Special Sweeps." The police officers and CACC
employees go door to door in areas with reported aggressive dog problems. If there are any violations observed, dogs
are impounded. The supervisor of dispatch at CACC stated that she does have the option of denying NYPD Special
Sweep officers assistance, if CACC rescue drivers are too busy with other calls.
Recommendation: There must be increased emphasis on returning pets to owners, starting with CACC rescue drivers. It
should be standard policy that reuniting pets with owners is of paramount importance. A standard form (Notice of
Impoundment) should be designed, notifying possible owners that their pet was impounded. This form should include the
time and date of impoundment, the holding time limit, location and hours of the animal shelter the animal was taken to,
and fees and/or penalties involved.
If an owner is located, rescue drivers should contact CACC dispatch, who in turn should check computer records for any
prior complaints. First time offenders should be educated and/or issued citations and the pet returned off the truck. This
procedure may be cumbersome at first but can be an excellent public relations tool, emphasizing owner education (and,
hopefully, prevention of future problems) rather than strictly impounding animals.
Forms and Record Keeping
Overall, the CACC standard forms relating to field services are adequate; but there is room for improvement in several
of the forms. Examples of areas that could be modified to improve operations include:
The rabies vaccination form has no space for owner phone numbers or whether or not the animal is sterilized.
The application for dog license asks only if the dog was vaccinated with a check off box for yes or no; there is no space
for date of rabies vaccination and expiration nor for veterinarian or veterinary clinic information.
The animal bite report lacks spaces to note whether or not the animal is neutered, the animal's name, the animal's
behavior (normal or abnormal), whether or not the animal is vaccinated and an expiration date of vaccination, the
veterinarian or clinic where the animal was vaccinated, location of quarantine, parent information of minors, previous
history of bites by same animal, as well as final disposition of animal at the end of quarantine. (Although there are a few
lines for CACC and DoH official use only which may serve for disposition information.)
The daily rescue report lacks spaces for the following information: starting mileage, vehicle number, and fuel/fluid
information, activity number of service requests, action taken or investigation information, animal receipt number, times
for going in service, out on location for each call, time out of service at the shelter, total time worked for that shift.
The route sheet ,which indicates animal receipt number and the address of impoundment, has too little space for
remarks or actions taken.
The citation form lacks space for defendants phone numbers.
The police intake form lacks spaces for location of impoundment, description of the animal, animal's temperament or
behavior, whether or not the animal is injured or was chemically immobilized, at what time it was chemically immobilized
and with how much drug, as well as who did the actual sedating of the animal, and any witnesses for follow up
investigation.
There is no official notice of impoundment form to notify possible owners that their animal may have been impounded
and how to reclaim their animal.
Recommendation: Create or design an official notice of impoundment to promote reuniting owners with pets. Improve
other forms by adding above information that is lacking on each form, with the exception of the daily rescue report and
drivers route sheet which can be combined into one form.
Equipment
Uniforms of CACC employees appear semi-professional. The polo type shirts are appropriate for animal control
employees; however, many of the employees were somewhat disheveled in their appearance (such as shirts hanging
out, wrinkled clothing, as well as well worn pants and shoes).
The supervisors appeared somewhat casual in their appearance. The name badges of the employees are laminated
photo identification badges that are worn around the neck with the information displayed sideways in a manner that is
difficult to read. Some of the employees did not wear identification.
The animal rescue vehicles are late model vans modified with Mavron® company caging that is accessible from the
inside. These vehicles are quite sufficient for animal control work, and are equipped with climate controlled ventilation
(both heating and air conditioning). The employees feel that the ventilation system adequately heats and cools
throughout the vehicle.
CACC has a total of twelve vehicles, eight of which are used for actual animal rescues. Three are used for transport of
animals from CACC receiving centers, and one is used for delivery of spay/neuter animals to clinics in Manhattan or
Brooklyn, as well as interoffice courier service and delivery of wild animals to rehabilitators. Dead animals are not
transported in CACC vehicles with the exception of rabies suspects, which are placed into garbage bags. According to
CACC rescue drivers, vehicle cages are cleaned and disinfected after each use.
Some (but not all) of the rescue drivers have animal stretchers on board to transport injured animals, and some rescue
drivers indicated that they preferred not to use stretchers. When asked how they transported injured animals to and
from the vehicle, the response was to muzzle and carry them.
Rescue drivers are given equipment on an as needed basis, but there is no formal procedure for issuance of
equipment, such as documentation by supervisor or signing for equipment by employees. All rescue drivers were
equipped with capture poles, ropes or leashes, and most had cat graspers or tongs. Some rescue drivers had heavy
duty leather gloves.
CACC employees who were questioned about chemical capture were all in favor of CACC employees being formally
trained and responsible for this service. Most replied that they felt NYPD was often too quick to sedate dogs and that
CACC employees would be able to restrain many of those dogs without chemical capture. In addition, CACC employees
expressed interest in the use of blow pipes rather than guns for the administration of chemical capture due to the
reduced impact of the dart and the silence of the delivery system.
Humane live traps are commonly used by CACC employees to capture nuisance wildlife and cats, as well as an
occasional dog. On rare occasions, CACC employees respond to requests for euthanasia as a service to individuals
with no other means of transport. There is a fee for this service and it appears that providing this service on a rare
occasion is not a problem for CACC; in fact, according to many CACC employees they are happy to provide this service
to many elderly or infirm citizens.
There are two employees whose job duties include the delivery of animals from receiving centers and to and from
spay/neuter clinics, as well as provide courier services between the CACC facilities.
Recommendations: Supervisors should hold themselves and their employees to the highest standard of appearance
and should insist that employees present themselves to the public in the most professional manner possible. Uniforms
and appearance should be revisited in an effort to improve public perception. Badges and agency patches on a neatly
pressed uniform enhances the professionalism of the field staff and improve public respect. Name badges should be
provided that are easily read by the public, including the name and title of the employee.
The CACC vehicles could be improved by adding holding compartments for ropes, leashes, gloves, disinfectant, etc.,
which could be attached to the inside of the doors. Rescue drivers should be assigned equipment for which they must
sign for and thus, become responsible for, to minimize loss of equipment and provide for accountability by that employee.
To facilitate responsible animal capture and control, we recommend that each vehicle contain the following minimum
equipment:
Capture gloves - These can be of critical importance to humans in preventing injuries to animals and ensure they are
handled humanely. Gloves are a wise investment, and should be sized to fit snugly, be made of a penetration-resistant
material, and be lined with a puncture-resistant material. Welders gloves, which are similar in design, do not offer the
needed protection and only offer a false sense of security. The capture gloves are available from several companies in
various price ranges.
Leashes - Leashes can serve many purposes, and trucks should be well-stocked. A number of manufacturers offer
nylon leashes at a nominal price.
Crates -many sizes and types of crates should always be kept on board for a variety of situations.
Cardboard Carriers - These, too, can be used for a variety of purposes, including the transportation of diseased or
dead animals.
Nets - Nets are an essential piece of equipment which can enable field staff to handle a variety of animals with minimal
restraint. Nets should be sturdy, at least twice as deep as the diameter, and flat on the end, not round.
Stretcher - Most animal stretchers have plastic or vinyl covers designed to help immobilize injured animals. The cover
fits over the prone animal and attaches to the stretcher with a securing material, such as Velcro.
Halters and lead ropes - These items should be carried in every field truck in cases of livestock rescue or confiscation.
Cameras- Both Polaroid and 35-mm cameras should be available in each vehicle for documenting animal-cruelty cases,
and for use in any situation where an animal's condition should be documented. At least one camcorder for the agency
is also crucial for documenting cruelty cases.
Wire and bolt cutters - Instruments may be needed in the field to remove tight collars or chains. Wire and bolt cutters
should be available to assist in animal confiscations or rescues. Cutters should be strong enough to cut through a one
quarter inch chain.
Flashlight - Flashlights should be available in all animal control vehicles. Industrial flashlights with industrial metal
casings for use in inclement weather are recommended.
First Aid Kits (for both animals and humans) - In assembling or updating a first aid kit, agencies should consult with its
insurance carrier, the American Red Cross, and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Kits should include
rubber gloves, goggles, and other recommended items.
Live traps -Traps should be on board for use in situations involving difficult capture. Commonly carried sizes for onboard
vehicles range from the small (squirrel) to medium (raccoon). At least one large trap (dog) should be available for
agency use.
As traps are replaced new traps should be purchased which allow for the safe transfer of trapped animals into carriers
designed to compliment the traps. Every rescue vehicle should have an emergency stretcher on board and all rescue
drivers should be instructed to utilize these, not only for the most humane transport of injured animals but for the safety
of the rescue drivers, as well.
Licensing
CACC shelters provide dog license applications and forward those onto the Department of Health (DoH). CACC
employees report that citizens inform them that there is a four to five month delay from the time they apply for the
license to the time they actually receive the tag.
According to CACC staff, local veterinarians who express an interest also provide license applications. Pet stores must
by law provide license applications to those people who purchase dogs from their business. The ASPCA also provides
applications to people who adopt dogs from their organization. There is no monetary incentive for agencies to provide
license applications, and all issuing of licenses is done by DoH and not the agencies where forms are located.
The Department of Health processes license applications, having to follow up and insure that those applying for licenses
have their dogs currently vaccinated. There is no licensing for cats in New York City, although the Department of Health
would have the most accurate records to prove that cats are more likely to come in contact with rabid wild animals AND
transmit rabies to people. Granted, cats are required to be vaccinated against rabies, and they are also required to
wear owner identification. Therefore it is unclear as to why there is no requirement for cats to be licensed as the
standard means of identification, as well as proof of rabies vaccination. This would be an additional source of revenue
for the issuing agency.
As part of the recent audit by the Office of the Comptroller, they were asked to investigate whether or not donations that
had been included with dog license applications received by DoH were being forwarded to CACC. In addition, the
auditing agency surveyed a number of donors, asking where they had intended their money to be used.
"DoH solicits donations from the public when it renews or issues dog licenses. DoH received donations totaling $43,108
in 1996 and $33,596 in 1997. According to DoH officials, these donations were not specifically designated for any
animal care and control program. Instead, the donations were deposited in the City's General Fund. However, we found
that most dog owners who made donations to DoH expected that their donations would be designated for animal care.
During our review, we noted that DoH's 1995 dog license renewal application requested donations for animal control
programs. Specifically, the form states: "You may continue to help support NYC's animal control programs by including
your donation with your license fee payment." This statement was not imprinted on DoH's 1996 or 1997 dog license
applications.
While the 1996 and 1997 dog license applications do not indicate how donations will be used by DoH, we found that
most dog owners are under the impression that their donations would be used to fund the City's animal care and control
efforts. Specifically, 68 of the 100 dog owners surveyed stated that they expected their donations to be used for animal
care and control programs. Thirty one of the dog owners surveyed indicated that they did not have a specific recipient in
mind for their donations. Only one of the dog owners surveyed indicated that he wanted his donation to go to DoH.
It should be noted that it is legal for DoH to deposit donations from dog owners into the City's General Fund. However,
given the results of our survey, we believe that it would be more appropriate for DoH to designate these funds for animal
care and control. Alternatively, DoH should make sure donors know that donated funds are for DoH/City, not CACC.
Auditor's Recommendation: DoH should forward to CACC all private donations received with dog license applications. If
DoH decides not to forward the donations, DoH should include a statement on the dog license applications indicating
that the donated funds are for DoH/City, not CACC.
DoH's Response: In response to this recommendation, DoH stated: we have taken alternative action. Effective February
4, 1998, the DoH Bureau of Veterinary Public Health Services has deleted the word 'DONATION' from all dog license
applications sent out. When new applications are printed, this correction will be made. Therefore, it will not be necessary
to include the statement suggested by the auditors."/61
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FN61/ Audit Report on the Financial Practices of the Center for Animal Care and Control; City of New York Office of the
Comptroller, Bureau of Financial Audit, FM98-093A, June, 1998.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, the auditors were asked to evaluate whether CACC staff was requiring adopters to purchase dog licenses at
the time of adoption (which is a provision of CACC's contract):
We found that CACC does not require its customers to submit applications and to pay the related dog licenses fees
when they adopt dogs from CACC. Thus, CACC is not in compliance with the Fourth Amendment of its contract, which
became effective January 1, 1997. Specifically, the Fourth Amendment states that CACC:
". . . shall require each person adopting a dog to submit a dog license application and pay all required dog licensing
fees . . ·
CACC did not adhere to this provision of the contract, during calendar year 1997. However, it should be noted that at
our exit conference on May 20, 1998, CACC officials stated that although the Fourth Amendment indicates a January 1,
1997 effective date, they did not sign the Amendment until July 3, 1997. Thus, CACC contends that they did not know
about this requirement until July 3, 1997. Assuming CACC was required to adhere to this provision retroactively to
January 1997, CACC inappropriately allowed individuals to adopt 3,649 unlicensed dogs from the shelter facilities. It
should also be noted that the related fees, if collected by CACC, would have amounted to approximately $31,000.
Assuming CACC was not required to adhere to this provision until July 3, 1997, CACC inappropriately allowed
individuals to adopt 1,775 unlicensed dogs from the shelter facilities and failed to collect $15,087.
City dog licensing requirements were established to provide for the licensing and identification of dogs, and for the
control and protection of the dog population. In this connection, CACC needs to make every effort to ensure that all
individuals file dog license applications before they are allowed to adopt dogs from the shelter facilities. This
requirement will help ensure that these dogs, if they are ever lost, can be returned to their rightful owners, which could
ultimately reduce the number of stray animals in New York City.
Auditors Recommendation: CACC should ensure that all shelter personnel require individuals adopting dogs to submit
applications for dog licenses, in accordance with CACC's contract.
Auditee's and DoH's Responses: CACC officials agreed and stated: "The application materials and the waiver forms
were not supplied to CACC by the Department (NYC DoH) until April 30, 1998 . . . . Currently CACC, after receiving the
materials from DoH on April 30,1998, has written a corporate protocol and has scheduled a meeting with shelter staff
(May 28, 1998) to discuss and finalize the procedures. CACC intends to implement a procedure, in compliance with
contract requirements, in June 1998."
In its response, DoH stated that it 'will be monitoring CACC's and pet shops' sales of dog licenses as of July 1, 1998."
Auditors' Comments: Given the importance of the City's dog licensing requirements, we are surprised that it took DoH
nearly 11 months to provide CACC with the application materials and waiver forms. This delay resulted in CACC allowing
individuals to adopt 3,649 unlicensed dogs from the shelter facilities. In any case, we strongly recommend that DoH work
closely with CACC officials to ensure that all individuals submit dog license applications with the related fees to CACC
before they are allowed to adopt any dogs from the shelter facilities./62
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FN62/ Audit Report on the Financial Practices of the Center for Animal Care and Control; City of New York Office of the
Comptroller, Bureau of Financial Audit, FM98-093A, June, 1998.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to CACC and Department of Health staff, in a city of 7.3 million with an estimated pet population of at least two
million, there has been consistently only around 120,000 dog licenses issued per year by the Dept. Of Health over the
past several years.
Recommendations: The current structure for licensing compliance is difficult for pet owners to achieve. In addition, the
turn around time to receive a license from the DoH can be several months after a citizen has sent in the necessary fee.
Clearly, revenue will be lost by the recent removal of a"donation" option on the current licensing application.
The licensing program as it currently operates is only collecting a small portion of the potential funds it could, if it were
properly managed. Additionally, the CACC currently only receives $1.00 for every license issued, with the remainder
retained by the Department of Health. If this licensing program were coordinated through CACC to send out renewal
notices utilizing the Chameleon® software, then animal control staff could follow up with pet owners who do not comply
via mailer or random on site visits. Compliance could increase significantly, as well as the revenue generated which
could be used to offset the cost of providing animal control services.
Consider a theoretical calculation based on an estimated pet population of two million, with a 50% compliance rate, or
one million licenses sold. Take into account the city's progressive differential fee licensing program in place which
requires a $5.00 fee to be paid for sterilized pets and a $25.00 fee for intact pets. Further estimate for the purpose of
this illustration that licenses were divided equally between sterilized and intact animals, the revenue generated could
amount to approximately $15 million per year -- an estimated two and one half times the current operating budget for
CACC.
CACC should investigate the possibility of taking over the responsibility of issuing pet licensing. Generally, it is the
responsibility of the local animal control agency to assume the responsibility of licensing of dogs and cats, as that
agency has a vested interest in the identification of pets. CACC would benefit not only from the additional revenue
obtained, but from the additional information for their records, since it is ultimately responsible for enforcement.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
