willing to utilize Cooperative Foster/Adopter Contract
- organization is willing to complete and sign a Cooperative Foster Adopter Contract when requested by a foster or adopter
fosters and adopters can feel more comfortable and prepared when provided ample time to discuss a new animal entering their life. a comprehensive list of points to review can help both the foster/adopter and the organization ensure that no trait or requirement of the animal is incompatible.
Responsibility
worry-free, guilt-free adoption returns
- organization does not pressure fosters or adopters to keep an animal when inquiring about a return
- organization does not have burdensome requirements for that an individual must meet or timeline required prior to returning
fosters and adopters are more willing when an animal can be returned and without fear of the shelter or rescue treating them poorly.
accurate, comprehensive behavior assessments
- assessments are explained with an accurate basis in animal behavior
- bios are thorough and less than desirable behaviors are not described vaguely or sugar-coated
- it is noted when an animal's personality is not well known or understood
when the behavior of an animal is observed, thoroughly and accurately summarized, and clearly communicated to a foster or adopter, a match is far more likely to be sustainable.
safety oriented adoptability policies
- the organization can articulate what would deem an animal unadoptable
- animals that are not safe for a certain household are not permitted to be fostered or adopted by such a household
- animals that pose a notable risk of danger are not adopted out
while it is difficult to create blanket criteria, organizations should not be placing animals in homes that pose a determined level of risk to its adopter, foster, other animals, or society. doing so is unethical and creates a negative ripple effect that damages public sentiment regarding shelters and rescues. for more, read: The Perils of Placing Marginal Dogs
proactive planning for foster placement
- animals are not taken in to by the organization when kennel or foster space is not available
- animals are not placed into boarding because the organization agreed to intake an animal that they do not have space for
- there is an executable plan allowing for the potential for foster or adoptive returns at all times
- for municipal shelters required to intake all animals: the shelter actively reviews all residents on an ongoing basis for potential adoptable animals that can be adopted or transferred out to make space and makes space by euthanasia when necessary to avoid overcrowding
prior to agreeing to intake each animal, the organization has a plan for brick and mortar shelter or foster placement. no organization can effectively serve its animals well when operating outside its resources.
fact-based explanation of sources
- the organization does invent or embellish circumstances surrounding an animal's intake or past history
- speculation as to an animal's previous circumstances is not encouraged especially online
only necessary, known information should be shared relating to an animal's intake. straying from such creates unnecessary speculation around the animal and its source that detracts from productive discussion and rescue duties. further, narratives based on suspicion do not help the rescue community as a whole to identify real areas of concerns and develop solutions.
Community
no-shame intakes
- during intakes, the organization does not guilt the releasing party and conducts themselves as a partner with respect for those they engage with
- intakes are provided sufficient time and attention to gather all information about the incoming animal
- the organization does not disseminate, engage in, or allow disparaging comments or discussion relating to an animal's intake source
the focus of an animal's intake story should be objective. shaming a source for needing the help of a shelter or rescue is unproductive in providing care for the animal taken in. it is far more likely for an animal in need to not receive the help it needs if the releasing party feels an intake process will be make them uncomfortable by the way an organization responds.
resources offered for owner surrender inquiries
- the organization offers any and all resources it is aware of and can spare in an effort to keep a pet in a home that it can stay in
- the organization does not pressure or require an owner to surrender in order for an animal to receive resources that the organization is willing to provide
keeping pets in the homes they already have is an immediate solution for a potentially homeless animal. when resources such as food, supplies, training assistance, or medical care are the only reasons an owner is seeking to surrender, it is the best use of an organization's financial, time, and space resources to keep the animal in its home as opposed to allocate space in the organization when there are other animals in need of space with no ability to remain in their home. it has been proven that donations and assistance can be generated by organizations including shelters and rescues to support such cases.
reunification aimed stray intake policies
- due diligence is exercised in publicly sharing all found animals
- reclaims provided outside of stray hold period without requiring "adoption" of one's own animal or any other burdensome criteria
there is no just reason for a shelter or rescue not to do the most they can to communicate a found animal and reunite. when animals can easily be located by a seeking owner and no extensive barriers to reclaiming exist, the resources and space expended on said animal can be allotted to another animal in need.
animals are kept up to date medically
- animals are kept up to date on all necessary vaccinations and preventatives based on veterinary guidance and their geographic location
- complete vaccination and preventative records are provided at adoption
keeping animals in an organization's care up to date at all times decreases the chance of medical expenses for illness and disease, promotes the health of all other animals in the organization, and exemplifies the duty that shelters and rescues have to not contribute to contagious illness and disease in their community.
assumes cost of medical oversights
- remedy for illness, disease, or condition that could have reasonably been missed or developed in the organization's care is covered by the organization
- remedy offered does not pose extensive burden of travel or requirement to the foster or adopter
everyone is human and sometimes mistakes are made. to establish a relationship of trust and accountability with the public, organizations should be willing to cover the costs of spay/neuter if an intact animal was erroneously deemed altered. Likewise, if the animal is determined to be affected by a contagious illness or disease and it's likely it could have been incubating while in an organization's care or missed by the organization, the organization should be willing to cover the expenses.
Longevity
quality of life as priority
- animals are consistently reviewed for quality of life
- animals are humanely euthanized when deemed of poor quality of life and unlikely to improve in a timely manner with readily available resources
- animals with poor quality of life are not fostered or adopted out unless the placement possesses conditions that will significantly improve quality of life
a shelter or rescue's duty is not only to intake and adopt out animals, but to ensure animals in care are mentally, emotionally, and physically well. unwell animals are more susceptible to developing medical and behavioral concerns costing additional resources and decreasing the animal's likelihood to be adopted. when an animal's quality of life is poor and cannot be improved in a timely manner with readily available resources, the animal should be reviewed for humane euthanasia.
funds available prior to intake decisions
- the organization possesses funds equal to the cost of all medical and behavioral needs, supplies, and any other associated costs of each new intake prior to planning the intake
- for municipal shelters required to intake all animals: does not apply
when an organization has sufficient funds to provide ongoing care for all current animals within the organization, excess for unexpected expenses and emergencies, and the specific funds needed to care for a new intake, should an organization elect to intake a new animal. planning to intake a new animal prior to funds for said animal being readily available can give the appearance to the public that the organization is unprepared, causes unnecessary stress on the organization to meet the fundraising demand, can lead to inappropriately sensationalizing the intake, and the potential for insufficient funds and delayed care.
elects for spay aborts
- with little exception, the organization elects for spay aborts
- the organization shares information known about the mother (and father if animal's
allowing litters to be birthed in a shelter or rescue contributes to the homeless pet problem in more ways than population alone. not only are the behavior and medical genetics of a litter and pregnant animal's capacity to whelp the litter unknown, but the birthing process and raising of the litter opens an organization to risk and expense. often the vaccination and contagious illness exposure status of many pregnant animals is unknown. quickly moving a pregnant animal to a foster home to avoid shelter birth can put other resident animals at risk. choosing to allow an animal to birth a litter ensures she must remain in the organization's care for at least 8 weeks with her and her litter holding shelter and foster space. should the mother animal require medical care or training prior to adoption, such needs cannot be met during the time she is whelping her litter leading to delay in needed treatment. it is rarely possible for an organization to determine if a rescue-birthed litter will develop life altering behavior or medical concerns which can lead to return or re-entry into the rescue system later in life.
honest representation of breeders and breeder patrons
- the organization properly distinguishes between breeders when referring to breeders
- the organization recognizes that a shelter or rescue animal is not a good fit for all owners
acknowledging that a shelter or rescue animal is not a fit for every pet owner aids in adoption matches being sustainable. an organization that speaks negatively of all breeders incorrectly groups backyard breeders, accidental litters, and responsible, ethical breeders and erodes the relationship between ethical breeders and the rescue community. responsible, ethical breeders do not contribute to the homeless animal population as they always take back animals they produce, the animals produced are intentionally bred to produce healthy, stable animals that do not lose their homes due to behavior or medical issues, and are more likely to be able remain in a home for life despite life changes. ethically bred dogs are bred responsibly and parent animals are beloved, well cared for pets. many ethical breeders and breeder patrons contribute time and donations to shelters, rescues, and similar causes.
does not provide payment to breeders or puppy mills and discloses origins
- the organization discloses the origin of animals acquired from a breeder or puppy mill
- the organization does not withhold or ambiguate breeder or puppy mill sources for purposes of maintaining relationship with sources so they may continue to acquire animals from the source in the future
- funds or compensation is never provided to breeders or puppy mills to acquire an animal
when a habitual source of animals entering the rescuing system can be identified, an organization should consider solutions to resolving the need for continual support and resource allocation. breeders and puppy mills that release surplus animals to shelters or rescues should be known by the public so that an individual seeking to purchase an animal does not unknowingly patronize such breeders. an organization providing payment to a breeder or puppy mill may feel they are saving the animals at the time, however doing so is an inappropriate use of rescue funds and directly benefits and enables the breeder.
