Stu Bykofsky | PACCA blistered in expert's
study
LACK OF ACCOUNTABILITY CITED
MASSIVE problems at the Philadelphia Animal Care
and Control Association revealed by the
Daily News
last year can be explained by one big word -
accountability.
There is none, says Nathan J. Winograd, the
animal shelter expert brought in by the
problem-plagued agency to analyze its operations
and write a report guiding PACCA to "no kill"
status within 10 years.
The day before he left Philadelphia after a
15-day immersion in PACCA, Winograd gave me an
exclusive review of what he found.
"There are incredible inefficiencies here that
result in killing too many animals," says
Winograd, a former California deputy district
attorney who lives in San Diego with a wife, two
kids, two dogs and eight cats.
Over and over he repeated "PACCA has to clean
house," and he wasn't talking about the
oft-dirty animal cages.
In how many ways is PACCA deficient? Let
Winograd count the ways:
"No written protocols, no adequate staff
training, no adequate staff supervision, no
accountability, no integrity in the data or
operations, an inadequate adoption program, no
pre-adoption sterilization," he ticks off.
Quite a laundry list for what's been called the
PACCA House of Horrors, where some animals are
put down within minutes of their arrival, where
others vanish and where animals and the public
routinely are abused.
Narrow it down, Nathan.
"Accountability is Number One. It's the thread
that runs through every aspect of shelter
operations," the 44-year-old Winograd says.
PACCA deserves credit for hiring Winograd to
write a prescription for what's likely to be
bitter public medicine for the shelter,
especially since management was in denial for a
long time. The Nov. 4 City Council hearing
requested by Councilman Jack Kelly probably
provided a wakeup call.
One of PACCA's biggest flaws is the computer
system, which lacks integrity, says Winograd.
"Right now, virtually any employee can go to any
computer terminal and delete records."
That lends credibility to the suspicion that
PACCA staffers have taken animals for either
personal use or for sale to a pet shop.
"It's more than possible. It's
easy.
It's not that I saw it - I did not see it'"
Winograd says. "There is very little stopping a
dog or cat going out that door at 2 o'clock in
the morning."
There's an "easy fix," starting with password
protection "so that only key personnel" can get
into the computer system. Other protections
include making files impossible to delete and
duplicating data to create an "audit trail," to
avoid cases such as Dutchess, reported in the
Daily News,
where one PACCA worker told the owner the
4-month-old black poodle was in the shelter and
another said it was never there at all.
Fixing the long-broken videotape system also
would promote accountability, says Winograd, who
will ask that it be fixed and extended into two
additional rooms.
Videotaping should curtail the practice of
hosing cages with dogs still in them and other
evil practices, such as battering cats and
kittens. Even without videotape, bad staff
behavior could be reduced if supervisors got off
their butts and walked around to supervise, he
says.
During his PACCA stay, some employees were
written up and one was suspended.
"Whether that is the new culture or because I am
here I could not tell you," says Winograd, who
declined to name names.
He acknowledged the two-headed monster of
nepotism and favoritism still exists and will
suggest cures in his report.
Shelters where he previously worked - San
Francisco and Tompkins County, N.Y. - set the
"new standard" by moving to "no kill." PACCA
needs to do the same.
Winograd asks, "Are they killing animals? Yes.
Do they have to kill animals right now? Yes. Are
they saving enough given all the constraints?
No.
"They can save more."
|
