Porter County & Municipal Governments Animal Intake & Animal Control Services Cost Allocation Method. Page 1

Transcription

1 Porter County & Municipal Governments Animal Intake & Animal Control Services Cost Allocation Method Page 1

2 Table Of Contents 1. Introduction Page 3 2. Animal Shelter And Animal Control Total Expenses Page 4 3. Animal Shelter Intake & Expense Analysis By Municipal Jurisdiction Page 5 4. Animal Control Calls For Service & Expense Analysis By Municipal Jurisdiction Page 6 5. Current Municipal Cost Allocation Methodology Page 7 6. New Data Driven Municipal Cost Allocation Methodology Page 9 7. New Animal Shelter Component Cost Allocation Methodology Page New Animal Control Component Cost Allocation Methodology Page New Annual Contract Adjusted Fees Page What The Shelter Is Doing To Control Costs Page What Municipalities Can Do To Control Costs Page 14 Page 2

3 1. Introduction The County is proud to report that many positive changes have taken place since our last contract period began on August 1, These improvements have resulted in higher quality services for the citizens and municipalities that we serve. New Shelter In June of 2017, we held the grand opening of our new Porter County Animal Shelter. With an investment of nearly $3.25 million dollars, we now have a new state of the art shelter that our citizens can be proud of. By combining a $1 million private contribution with $2.25 million in hospital interest proceeds, this achievement was made without using taxpayer funds or contributions from municipalities. Animal Control Simultaneously with the opening of the new shelter, the animal control function and staff were transferred from the Porter County Sheriff s Department to the new shelter, reporting directly to the shelter Director, allowing for the delivery of quality services with more efficiency and cost effective management. Data Management With modifications to the shelter s animal inventory management system, we are now able to precisely track and report on animal intakes and outcomes. In our first round of enhancements, we can now determine both the intake reason and municipal jurisdiction of every animal that comes into the shelter and adoption outcomes by municipal jurisdiction. This information is important to assure that cost allocations to municipalities are fair and equitable. With other planned future enhancements, we will be able to track average daily animal inventory, average animal length of stay per jurisdiction, and veterinary costs per animal and jurisdiction. Financial Management As with the previous contract, we will set aside the municipality s contract payments in dedicated funds for shelter and animal control services. Through better internal controls, we can now provide a complete picture of the costs of operating each. The shelter is implementing actions to control and/or reduce costs (see page 13). The Data and Financial Management enhancements were implemented to assure transparency and accountability with our partners. With these changes, it was appropriate to revisit the municipal allocation methodology that was used in our previous contract. With a year of actual expense history at the new shelter, along with new and more precise data on animal intakes and animal control calls for service, we can more accurately reflect real costs based on the actual services the county provides to the municipalities. Additionally, because of the new data and analysis, we can provide recommendations to municipalities on how they can join with us to control or reduce costs. Page 3

4 2. Animal Shelter And Animal Control Total Expenses The chart below reflects the actual costs the County has incurred for operations of the Animal Shelter and Animal Control for the period of July 1, 2017 through June 30, This includes providing Animal Shelter services for unincorporated Porter County and all municipal jurisdictions, and Animal Control services for unincorporated Porter County and municipal jurisdictions except for the City of Portage. Animal Animal Combined SHELTER CONTROL Expense Total Total Total Salaries 169, , ,669 Hourly 184, ,247 Overtime Health Insurance (FT Only) 89,149 60, ,979 PERF (FT Only) 18,984 16,259 35,243 FICA (FT & PT) 27,062 11,105 38,167 Other Supplies 61, ,353 Household/Bedding 17, ,146 Building Maintenance NIPSCO 43, ,127 Water & Sewer 6, ,269 Garbage Disposal 6, ,032 Auto Insurance Property Insurance 2, ,410 Liability Insurance Workman's Compensation 6, ,202 Training & Education 3, ,362 Vet Services 62, ,035 Telephone Advertising 1, ,156 Maintenance Agreements Equip Other Than Vehicles Vehicle Repairs Dues & Subscriptions Contractual Services Reimbursements Uniforms 0 1,993 1,993 Total Expenses $700,303 $235,356 $935,659 Total Expenses By Category Labor Costs % Supplies % Vet Services % Utilities/Garbage % Insurance -.41% Training & Education -.36% Advertising -.12% Uniforms -.21% Miscellaneous -.05% Page 4

5 3. Animal Shelter Intake & Expense Analysis By Municipal Jurisdiction The chart below reflects animal intakes at the Shelter by category and municipal jurisdiction for the period of July 1, 2017 through June 30, % of the total animal intakes were from unincorporated Porter County, with 50.3% coming from the municipalities. Based on total Shelter expenses of $700,303 and 963 total animal intakes, the average cost per intake is approximately $727. Highlighted in yellow are the actual costs per municipality based on the Animal Shelter total costs (see page 4) and intakes from each municipality. Bev Shores Burns Harbor Chesterton Hebron Kouts Ogd Dunes Pines Portage Porter Valparaiso County Intake Category # % # % # % # % # % # % # % # % # % # % # % # % Owner Surrender 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % 4 4.2% 1 1.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % 0 0.0% % % % Seized 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 3 2.1% 1 0.7% 1 0.7% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2 1.4% 0 0.0% 4 2.8% % % Service In 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 4.8% 0 0.0% % % % Stray - ACO/Police 0 0.0% 4 1.5% % 7 2.6% 5 1.9% 2 0.8% 0 0.0% % 7 2.6% % % % Stray - Public Drop Off 0 0.0% 2 0.5% % % 9 2.2% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % 4 1.0% % % % Stray - Other 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % % Total 0 0.0% 6 0.6% % % % 2 0.2% 0 0.0% % % % % % Actual Costs $0 $4,363 $43,633 $16,726 $11,635 $1,454 $0 $138,897 $7,999 $127,262 $348,333 $700,303 Total Page 5

6 4. Animal Control Calls For Service & Expense Analysis By Municipal Jurisdiction The chart below reflects Animal Control Calls For Service by service category and municipal jurisdiction for the period of July 1, 2017 through June 30, % of the total animal control calls were from unincorporated Porter County, with 46.1% coming from the municipalities. Based on total Animal Control expenses of $235,356 and 1,150 total animal control calls for service, the average cost per call for service is approximately $205. Highlighted in yellow are the actual costs per municipality based on the Animal Control total costs (see page 4) and calls for service from each municipality. Service Category # % # % # % # % # % # % # % # % # % # % # % # % Animal Bite 2 0.8% 4 1.6% % 3 1.2% 2 0.8% 5 2.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % % % % Lost/Found (Strays) 2 1.1% 4 2.3% % 3 1.7% 5 2.9% 1 0.6% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 7 4.0% % % % Animal Injured 0 0.0% 2 2.2% 7 7.6% 3 3.3% 0 0.0% 1 1.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 8 8.7% % % % Animal Nuisance 1 0.2% % % 7 1.7% 3 0.7% 4 1.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % % % % Other* 1 0.4% 6 2.6% % 5 2.1% 7 3.0% 2 0.9% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % % % % Total 6 0.5% % % % % % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % % % % Actual Costs Bev Shores Burns Harbor Chesterton Hebron Kouts $1,228 $5,730 $20,056 $4,298 $3,479 Ogd Dunes Pines Portage Porter Valparaiso County Total $2,661 $0 $0 $11,870 $59,146 $126,888 *Other includes Animal Cruelty, Dangerous Animals, Assisting With Wellness Checks, Traffic Stops, Crime Scenes, Road Obstructions & Police Assistance Requests. $235,356 Note: This chart does not reflect the 948 phone calls received by Animal Control that did not result in the dispatch of an Animal Control Officer. Page 6

7 5. Current Municipal Cost Allocation Methodology The current cost allocation methodology used by the County and Municipalities in the contracts was primarily based on the annually recorded animal control calls for service for each city and town. While the method was an honest attempt to reach equitable allocations calculated on the best data available at that time, there were shortfalls. The Calls For Service did not directly correlate to the actual number of animal intakes and resulting animal shelter costs. Not every call resulted in pick-up of an animal. Owner surrenders and stray drop-off of animals by the public were not considered. Costs of animal sheltering greatly exceeds the costs of animal control. Based on the Current Municipal Cost Allocation Methodology, the chart below compares the actual costs of services to the current annual contract fees paid by each municipal jurisdiction. The difference between the two is the amount that County government currently subsidizes for each municipality. Animal Shelter Portion Animal Control Portion Total Combined Costs % Of Actual Municipal County % Of Actual Municipal County Actual Municipal County Jurisdiction Intakes Cost* Contract Fee Subsidy Calls Cost** Contract Fee Subsidy Cost Contract Fee Subsidy Beverly Shores 0.0% $0 $800 -$ % $1,228 $800 $428 $1,228 $1,600 -$372 Burns Harbor 0.6% $4,363 $800 $3, % $5,730 $800 $4,930 $10,093 $1,600 $8,493 Chesterton 6.2% $43,633 $15,560 $28, % $20,056 $15,560 $4,496 $63,689 $31,120 $32,569 Hebron 2.4% $16,726 $2,800 $13, % $4,298 $2,800 $1,498 $21,024 $5,600 $15,424 Kouts 1.7% $11,635 $800 $10, % $3,479 $800 $2,679 $15,114 $1,600 $13,514 Ogden Dunes 0.2% $1,454 $0 $1, % $2,661 $0 $2,661 $4,115 $0 $4,115 Pines 0.0% $0 $1,200 -$1, % $0 $1,200 -$1,200 $0 $2,400 -$2,400 Portage 19.8% $138,897 $36,000 $102, % $0 $0 $0 $138,897 $36,000 $102,897 Porter 1.1% $7,999 $5,760 $2, % $11,870 $5,760 $6,110 $19,869 $11,520 $8,349 Valparaiso 18.2% $127,262 $31,600 $95, % $59,146 $31,600 $27,546 $186,408 $63,200 $123,208 County 49.7% $348,333 $348,333 $0 53.9% $126,888 $126,888 $0 $475,221 $475,221 $0 Total 100.0% $700,303 $443,653 $256, % $235,356 $186,208 $49,148 $935,658 $629,861 $305,797 Page 7

8 5. Current Municipal Cost Allocation Methodology (continued) The charts directly below compare the percentage of animal intakes from municipalities to the percentage of expenses paid by municipalities. During the period of July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018, the municipalities accounted for 49.7% of the total animal intakes, while only contributing only 13.6% of the total shelter expenses. % Of Animal Intakes % Of Shelter Expenses Paid 13.6% 49.7% 50.3% Municipalities County Municipalities County 86.4% The charts directly below compare the percentage of animal control calls from municipalities to the percentage of expenses paid by municipalities. During the period of July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018, the municipalities accounted for 46.1% of the total animal calls, while only contributing only 25.2% of the total animal control expenses. % Of Animal Control Calls % Of A/C Expenses Paid 53.9% 46.1% Municipalities County 74.8% 25.2% Municipalities County Page 8

9 6. New Data Driven Municipal Cost Allocation Methodology To address inadequacies in the current methodology for allocating costs to municipalities and reflect expenses separately for Animal Intakes and Animal Control, the new methodology will be broken into to the following two components Animal Shelter Component The new allocation method will only consider the shelter s variable costs (Hourly Wages, FICA, Other Supplies, Household/Bedding and Veterinary Costs) that are directly driven by the number of animals that the shelter must house and care for. The share for each municipality will be primarily based on the number of intakes from each. Animal Control Component The new allocation method will only consider the amount the county would save if it did not provide animal control services to the municipalities. The share for each municipality will primarily be based on the number of calls for service from each. Page 9

10 7. New Animal Shelter Component Cost Allocation Methodology The total expenses for the operation of the Animal Shelter are comprised of both fixed costs and variable costs. The County recognizes that the fixed costs would be incurred whether or not the shelter took intakes from the municipalities, and it would be unfair to allocate those fixed costs to the municipalities. Instead, we have isolated variable costs (Hourly Wages, FICA, Other Supplies, Household/Bedding and Veterinary Costs) that are directly driven by the number of animal intakes for which the municipalities have a significant impact. In determining what portion of the variable costs would be allocated to municipalities, we considered using the actual ratio of animal intakes of the combined municipalities (50.3%) and unincorporated county (49.7%), or flat percentage of the total variable costs. Because we are relying on only one year of actual intake data and expenses, we decided to cap the municipal share at 30% for the next contract period. We also feel that the municipalities should be offered the opportunity to become true partners in helping to control and/or reduce our variable expenses. The shelter is working hard to keep these variable costs under control. The municipalities should share in that commitment. See pages 13 through 15 for information about how the Shelter is working to reduce variable costs, and what the municipalities can do to help. Actual Allocation Based On Intakes Allocation Based On 30% Cap Variable Expenses Costs County Share Municipal Share County Share Municipal Share Hourly Wages $184,727 $91,809 $92,918 $129,309 $55,418 FICA $14,132 $7,023 $7,108 $9,892 $4,239 Other Supplies $61,353 $30,492 $30,861 $42,947 $18,406 Household/Bedding $17,146 $8,522 $8,624 $12,002 $5,144 Veterinary Costs $62,035 $30,831 $31,204 $43,425 $18,611 Total $339,393 $168,678 $170,714 $237,575 $101,818 Based on the $101,818 municipal share of variable costs, each municipality will be allocated a portion based on their number of intakes as detailed below. Bev Shores Burns Harbor Chesterton Hebron Kouts Ogd Dunes Pines Portage Porter Valparaiso Total Intake Category # % # % # % # % # % # % # % # % # % # % # % Owner Surrender 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % 4 6.9% 1 1.7% % 0 0.0% % 0 0.0% % % Sei zed* 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % 1 9.1% 1 9.1% % 0 0.0% % 0 0.0% % % Servi ce In** 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % 0 0.0% % 0 0.0% % 9 100% Stra y - ACO/Pol i ce 0 0.0% 4 2.3% % 7 4.0% 5 2.9% % 0 0.0% % 7 4.0% % % Stra y - Publ i c Drop Off 0 0.0% 2 0.9% % % 9 3.9% % 0 0.0% % 4 1.8% % % Stra y - Other*** 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % 0 0.0% % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 4 100% Tota l 0 0.0% 6 1.2% % % % % 0 0.0% % % % % Municipal Allocation $0 $1,262 $12,622 $4,838 $3,366 $421 $0 $40,180 $2,314 $36,814 $101,818 Page 10

11 8. New Animal Control Component Cost Allocation Methodology The current method for allocating animal control costs assumed that the percentage of calls for service directly correlated to the budgeted salaries. (i.e. If 50% of the calls came from municipalities, then they should split 50% of the budget among them.) In this new methodology, the County did an analysis to determine what costs would still have to be paid if we did not provide services to the municipalities. Costs With Municipalities: For providing Animal Control services to all of the county except for Portage, our current budget of $235,356 includes one half of the Shelter Director salary, 1 full time Senior ACO, two full time ACO s, and associated benefits and FICA. Costs Without Municipalities: If we did NOT provide Animal Control Services to any municipalities, we would restructure the department to include one half of the Shelter Director salary, two full time ACO s, and associated benefits and FICA. Therefore, we are asking the municipalities to share the $59,223 in variable costs that the county would not incur if we were not providing them animal control services. With Without Costs Municipalities Municipalities Difference Salaries $145,169 $107,438 -$37,731 Hourly $0 $0 $0 Health Insurance (FT Only) $60,830 $46,450 -$14,380 PERF (FT Only) $16,259 $12,033 -$4,226 FICA (FT & PT) $11,105 $8,219 -$2,886 Total $233,363 $174,140 -$59,223 Based on the $59,223 municipal share of costs, each municipality will be allocated a portion based on their number of calls for service as detailed below. Bev Shores Burns Harb Chesterton Hebron Kouts Ogd Dunes Pines Porter Valparaiso Total Service Category # % # % # % # % # % # % # % # % # % # % Animal Bite 2 1.7% 4 3.4% % 3 2.6% 2 1.7% 5 4.3% 0 0.0% % % % Lost/Found (Strays) 2 2.6% 4 5.2% % 3 3.9% 5 6.5% 1 1.3% 0 0.0% 7 9.1% % % Animal Injured 0 0.0% 2 5.3% % 3 7.9% 0 0.0% 1 2.6% 0 0.0% % % % Animal Nuisance 1 0.5% % % 7 3.6% 3 1.6% 4 2.1% 0 0.0% % % % Other* 1 0.9% 6 5.6% % 5 4.7% 7 6.5% 2 1.9% 0 0.0% % % % Total 6 1.1% % % % % % 0 0.0% % % % Municipal Allocation $670 $3,129 $10,951 $2,347 $1,900 $1,453 $0 $6,481 $32,293 $59,223 Page 11

12 9. New Annual Contract Adjusted Fees The County believes that the new data driven municipal cost allocation methodology is a fairer way to determine municipal contract fees. We also recognize that we are relying on only ONE YEAR of animal intake and animal control data, and one year does not constitute a trend. A swing of 10 or 15 animal intakes or calls for service in a single year could significantly impact any individual municipality allocation. To mitigate the potential for drastic swings in annual fees, we have made the following adjustments to the methodology for this new transitional contract period until we can accumulate more statistically sound data: a. A Minimum Annual Contract Fee of $2,000. b. The Total Allocated Costs calculated by the new methodology will be averaged with your current contract amount. c. The amount of decrease or increase between your current annual contract amount and new annual contract amount will be capped at 50%. Animal Shelter Animal Control Total Allocated Current New Municipality Portion Portion Costs Contract Contract Beverly Shores $0 $670 $670 $1,600 $2,000 Burns Harbor $1,262 $3,129 $4,391 $1,600 $2,000 Chesterton $12,622 $10,951 $23,573 $31,120 $27,347 Hebron $4,838 $2,347 $7,185 $5,600 $6,393 Kouts $3,366 $1,900 $5,266 $1,600 $2,400 Ogden Dunes $421 $1,453 $1,874 $1,600 $2,000 Pines $0 $0 $0 $2,400 $2,000 Portage $40,180 $0 $40,180 $36,000 $38,090 Porter $2,314 $6,481 $8,795 $11,520 $10,158 Valparaiso $36,814 $32,293 $69,107 $63,200 $66,154 Total $101,818 $59,223 $161,041 $156,240 $158,540 Page 12

13 10. What The Shelter Is Doing To Control Costs We understand that the municipalities are our partners, and we have a responsibility to implement processes and procedures that focus on cost control and prevention. To that end, the Porter County Animal Shelter: a. Seeks and receive substantial donations of pet food, pet supplies, bedding and cleaning supplies from the public. Examples include a social media campaign to purchase 100 new Kuranda dog beds in June of Within 6.5 hours over 100 beds, at a cost of nearly $8,000, were purchased by the public and sent to the shelter with free shipping. For the past five years, the shelter has not had to purchase laundry detergent and bleach because of public donations. b. Actively recruits and trains volunteers who assist at the shelter with cleaning and socializing hard to adopt animals, thus reducing hourly costs. c. Maintains a seven day quarantine for all new animals coming into the shelter. This process reduces the risk of communicable diseases being spread to the general animal population and controlling veterinary costs. Since instituting this procedure two years ago, there have been no outbreaks of disease at the shelter. d. Aggressively works to match stray pets with their owners, increasing the number of reclaims and reducing their length of stay. Every stray animal intake is scanned for a microchip to aid in returning them to their owners quickly. The shelter maintains a lost pet log which allows them to match strays that come into the shelter to owners who have reported them lost. It also allows Animal Control to match stray pets picked up on a call for service with their owners directly, avoiding intake of the animal at the shelter. The shelter also manages a Lost & Found Animals in Porter County Facebook page. Photos of all stray animals that come into the shelter, along with the location found, are posted on the page to attempt to match them with their owners so they can reclaim them from the shelter. With over 10,000 followers, this Facebook page reaches over 100,000 Facebook users every month. e. Maintains relationships with responsible rescue organizations throughout the region that will accept shelter animals with behavioral challenges and significant medical issues. During the period of July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018, 213 animals were placed with rescue organizations. f. Actively engages with pet owners who seek to surrender their animals to reduce the number of owner surrenders to the shelter. Shelter staff will coach owners to address their animal s behavior issues, provide referrals for support to owners facing financial difficulties, match owners with local rescue groups who will accept their animals, and provide tips for owners to re-home their animals with family members or friends. g. Aggressively promotes adoption of shelter animals. The shelter posts photos and descriptions to major animal adoption websites including Petfinder and Petango. The shelter maintains a Porter County Animal Shelter Facebook page with over 26,000 followers, and regularly posts photos and descriptions of adoptable animals. This Facebook page reaches nearly 200,000 Facebook users every month which is directly attributable to increased adoption rates. In addition, shelter staff, accompanied by adoptable animals, attend fairs, festivals and most events to which they are invited. In conjunction with Indiana 105, the shelter also does a weekly Facebook live segment featuring an adoptable animal. h. Launched a new website at which is more user friendly and mobile compatible, increasing public awareness of the shelter s mission, adoptable animals, volunteer and donating. i. Is working with veterinarians to perform onsite spay/neuter for animals housed at the shelter. By moving this service into the shelter, rather than taking the animals to vet offices, it will result in savings of veterinary costs. It will also help control hourly wages, as transport and waiting times to and from veterinary offices will be eliminated. j. Spays/Neuters and microchip every animal before they leave the shelter for their new home. Spaying/neutering reduces animal overpopulation and shelter costs over the long term. Microchipping facilitates a quicker return of lost and stray animals to their owners, reducing their length of stay at the shelter and variable costs. Page 13

14 11. What Municipalities Can Do To Control Costs During the period of July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018, there was a total of 963 animal intakes with 484 (50.3%) coming from the municipalities. During the same period there were 474 adoption outcomes were generated by the Shelter. Of those 474, only 183 (38.6%) had an outcome destination within the municipal jurisdictions. This disparity between intakes and adoptions has a direct impact on the shelter s variable costs. Inside Municipalities Outside Municipalities Intakes From % % Adoptions To % % The chart below details the number of intakes from and adoptions to each municipality, along with the ratio of adoptions to intakes. With the cooperation of municipalities, increasing the ratio of adoptions to intakes is very achievable. If we were able to increase the overall ratio from 37.8% to 60.0%, that would be a net reduction of over 100 housed animals. When you consider that the average cost per day per dog is $5.34 and $2.83 per day per cat, that kind of reduction of housed animals would certainly begin to make a positive impact in variable costs. Bev Shores Burns Harb Chesterton Hebron Kouts Ogd Dunes Pines Portage Porter Valparaiso Total Intakes From Adoptions To Difference % Intakes/Adoptions N/A 50.0% 35.0% 43.5% 50.0% 100.0% N/A 12.0% 45.5% 63.4% 37.8% On the previous page, we described what the shelter is doing to control and/or reduce variable costs. Because nearly half of the animals that come to the shelter belong to your citizens, our municipalities have an opportunity and a responsibility to become true partners in helping to control and/or reduce our variable expenses. On the following page, we have prepared suggestions to help you accomplish that goal. These actions won t cost you a penny but can make a difference in the costs you pay. Page 14

15 11. What Municipalities Can Do To Control Costs (continued) Advocate the Porter County Animal Shelter as the FIRST stop when your citizens are seeking to adopt a dog or cat. We practice thorough and vetted adoption practices and work very hard to appropriately match the right animal to the potential adopters living situation, family, and lifestyle. Every animal is spayed/neutered, vaccinated and microchipped before they leave the shelter. At $100 for dogs and $50 for cats, our adoption fees are extremely affordable when compared to other local shelters and rescues. The faster we can responsibly place an animal in a loving forever home, the less we spend to feed, house and care for them. Advocate that pet owners in your community spay/neuter their animals. Of the shelter s 963 animal intakes between July 1, 2017 and June 30, 2018, only 389 (40%) had been spayed or neutered. Every spay/neuter that the shelter must have performed on an adoptable animal costs $75. It will help reduce animal overpopulation and long-term costs, and have a direct impact on short term veterinary costs. Advocate that pet owners in your community microchip their animals. Think of it as a 21 st century dog tag. The quicker we can identify an owner, the quicker we can return their animal, which reduces our costs to house them in the shelter. Sponsor donation drives for the Shelter. We have found that if you ask, people are thrilled to contribute needed supplies that will benefit our animals. The more supplies that are donated, the less we spend. Shelter staff is more than happy to provide lists of needed supplies and will be happy to come and pick them up when your donation drive is over. Encourage your citizens to volunteer at the Shelter. Volunteer orientations are offered monthly. We utilize volunteers to assist in socializing and stimulating our animals, help with events and offsite projects, and performing housekeeping tasks (cleaning, laundry, feeding) to keep the shelter running smoothly and efficiently. The more hours our volunteers commit, the more savings we can achieve in the variable hourly wages. Invite the shelter to your events. The higher the profile the shelter has in your community, the more likely your citizens will engage with us to adopt an animal, volunteer or donate. The shelter staff will work with you to attend your events to achieve that goal. Promote our social media accounts through your social media accounts. Regularly encourage your citizens to follow our Porter County Animal Shelter and Lost And Found Animals In Porter County Facebook pages. Provide links to, or embed our news feeds, on your websites. The more followers we have on these pages, the more likely we are to find new homes for our adoptables or match lost pets with their owners. If you need help, contact us at curt.ellis@porterco.org Provide a link to our website on the home page of your websites. The shelter launched a new mobile compatible and user friendly website at that includes adoptable animal information, owner services, and a full section on animal control. Contact us at curt.ellis@porterco.org for more information. Avoid the stigmatization of breeds. Of the 543 dogs that came to the shelter from July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018, nearly 25% fell into the general category of pit bulls. These loving dogs are the ones that remain at the shelter the longest and are the most difficult to adopt. That also means they have a direct impact on our variable costs. The primary reason they are overlooked or ignored is the stigma associated with the term pit bulls. ANY DOG that is raised in loving and stable environment has the ability to be just as successful as any other dog. On the other hand, a dog that is raised in an abusive or unstable environment will certainly be more inclined to display acts of aggression. Our shelter Director is professionally accredited dog behavior expert. A behavior assessment is conducted with EVERY dog that enters the shelter to assure that they are not a threat to the public or other animals. Shelter staff works with dogs to correct modifiable behavioral issues before they are offered for adoption. Page 15