Why does the CEO of an animal charity organization need?

An excellent article. Our small community shelter removed the term " Humane Society" from their name to "Animal Shelter". Doing so saw their donations increase exponentially. While the H$U$ says that they ask people to donate to their local shelters, the public thinks that they are donating funds through the H$U$. The H$U$ does very little to educate the public as to where the money is going. Sure the H$U$ does help close down mills, hoarders and other bad animal situations however they take those animals to local shelters to rehome. Most times they don't even leave an adequate donation. Personally I will not donate to a shelter that has H$U$ or A$PCA propaganda around. It makes me wonder where the money is going.

I've always felt that CEOs and other high echelon in all charitible organizations should be paid around or les then $50,000 per year. The rest of the funds needs to go towards the purpose of the organization. I also feel that lobbying should be very restricted. I feel that these organizations need to lose their non-profit status. If they can affrd to pay things like Wayne Pacelle the "big bucks" they are no better then the publically traded for profit companies like Wal-Mart.

It is outrageous, deceptive, and very hurtful to the actual local shelters that work on a shoestring.

Please note that your local Humane Society is not affiliated with HSUS, HSUS does not have shelters, don't actually save or shelter dogs, and most of their money goes for salaries and p.r.

Not so with local shelters.

This has long been a very confused situation, with HSUS seeming to claim that they have shelters for dogs or run smaller, local Humane Societies --- they do not.

Still, the most cost effective way to save animals is to use breed rescues that are 501C registered charities. There are NO buildings to maintain, no salaries at all, dogs are in foster homes. ALL the donations go to vetting the dogs, the foster homes provide everything else, from food to toys, to treats, etc.

Most foster homes even buy the flea/.tick and heartworm preventative with their own money - I always have and I buy it for those foster homes in my area that can't afford to.

Donate to your local independent shelters, or better yet, breed rescues where there are no high salaries and media ads that absorb most of your donations.

Animal Services is county run (used to be called the pound), also with usually very little funding, if you can save a dog from there, you are literally saving its life in most cases.

All those pathetic ads you see on t.v. by HSUS should encourage you to donate where it will do the most good, local rescues, not to HSUS who does very little worthwhile with your money.

IBelow is my ramble - not well organized but I just don't feel inclined at the moment to edit.

The salary seems very high - but its also relative to what is out there. The problem with Not for Profit is they cannot attract good people if they don't pay .

Having said that - I think its disgusting to pay a salary to a CEO when the company cannnot meet its objectives. Measuring his /her worth should be determined based on number of placements, number of investigations, number of dogs treated - ie what overall has the charity achieved.

I don't know this particular shelter -but my guess is they don't disclose facts that make informed decisions easy -

Shelters and home rescue operations often operate on MUCH less - and in my opinion, are a better model for efficieny - the problem is, any 2 bit hoarder who decides to put out a shingle can have a rescue these days - and there is no licensing (To my knowledge) to ensure people are operating within the law beyond the standard mechanism for complaints any person is subject to.

The problem with shelters (In Ontario and Canada anyway) is that they have no governing powers or authority to investigate, make seizures, or lay charges under the Act - so in the end, in Canada anyway, we are stuck with the OSPCA as both judge and jury.

This has created a LOT of problems with HS and OSPCA fighting on policy and on how donations should be managed.

My final answer The whole thing needs overhauling - the OSPCA is political, ineffective, and not motivated to save animals . Shelters run by private people should be licensed to prevent the idiot mom and pops.

********

Added more to my soapbox :-)

Do I donate to charity - YES. Up until last year, I would always give money to salvation army - but along with the fraud, I found out the charity has quite a fanatical origin based on religious beliefs I don't happen to feel are valid for any kind of charity that advertises it helps the poor, so I stopped.

Do I donate to HS (Canada) - NO. But I have given money to private rescues simply because I met the people and felt they deserved some help.

Do I donate to animal charities - YES, my preferred is WWF .

*******

Yeah, the American HS seems really really bizarre and being here on YA, I'm kind of creeped out by it. I want to believe the Canadian HS is not as extreme - I'm not sure but it doesn't SEEM to be.

The CEO of the Toronto Humane Society - one of the largest and oldest HS was CHARGED by the OSPCA for cruelty charges - shut down - a long investigation. This is the kind of infighting we have. Really incredible, and it left me thinking these government run animal shelters are full of kooks :-) The CEO was definitely a nut and was kicked out.

**************

Edited for space: I'm not familiar with the US model or HSUS and scanned the article - but I think people have to differentiate between those shelters that actually treat, house, and rehome pets and the ASPCA which I believe in the US is the same in Ontario (OSPCA) and Canada (SPCA) - it is the legal authority governing the Animal Act .

It would make sense that a legal authority would spend majority of donations on salaries because that is what they do. They are stewards - or in political lingo - the police for animals.

The problem here in Canada is the SPCA does BOTH - and that is wrong as it allows them to decide the treatment they give to shelter pets. A recent history example was there was THOUGHT to be an outbreak of Ring worm at an OSPCA owned and operated shelter - and they decided rather than treat the dogs - they PTS - initial counts were almost 100 dogs were killed before public outrage stopped them. They then tore down the shelter and rebuilt with big screen TVs, doggy salon etc - resulting in even LESS space allocated to actual dogs needing shelter. It was a big business model for profit - vs providing a home for every dog that needs it.

The attached link indicates as a result of an inquiry a year later - it was determined there was no ringworm, that the OSPCA did not keep accurate records, and they are not sure how many dogs were PTS - but it was about 60 - and acknowledge their was a "rush to judgement to depopulate" (politically correct term used to kill dogs)

Sickening and its not likely going to change anytime soon. People DONATE to the OSPCA because they BELIEVE the organization is invested in animal care and sheltering animals. It was sickening to read this.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2011/06/04/did_57_...

You make a very good point. Tom Vilsack, the Secretary of Agriculture, who handles a far bigger portfolio than the HSUS, received a salary of $196,700 for 2012.