Definitely need more scrutiny into some of these groups. Whenever we can donate directly to a cause rather than through a "middleman," it might be wise to do so. Additionally, I believe that when local taxpayers help fund or donate to organizations, they also have the right to sue if they believe funds are being mismanaged. I do know that the Animal Legal Defense Fund has worked with citizens and whistleblowers in the past to file suits.
So true, Annoula! I'm haunted by a report I heard recently that found donors don't care how their donations are used, they are only interested in the "good feeling" they get when they give. We certainly don't want to discourage people from giving and getting that good feeling, but we must find a way to encourage people to balance their giving with an evidence their gift will to to its intended purpose.
Thank you for this article and the others about LA. They make for a very disturbing read. I have worked full time in animal rights in various capacities since 1976. It's always been my dream that one day I will be out of a job as will everyone else who works in this sector. Our services will no longer be needed. The animals are freed from human tyranny. This may well be naive thinking. But it does beg the question: How cost effective are these organisations? In animal advocacy, there's an industry of organisations dedicated to effective altruism and supporting organisations that they deem to be cost effective. I have issues with their utiltitarian ideology and strategic approaches. But I digress...the point I need to get to is this. How come after all this money has been donated and bequeathed and spent the problem of companion animals in society persists?
Kim, thank you, friend, for your thoughtful response and for sharing your long-standing commitment to animal rights with the Animal Politics folks who I encourage to subscribe to your Substack.
Your concerns resonate deeply, especially when considering how much time, money, and effort have been dedicated to addressing the plight of companion animals, yet the problem persists. The question of cost-effectiveness is critical, and it's one of the reasons why this article calls for a comprehensive audit.
I believe that transparency is key to ensuring that donations are being used as intended—to benefit local animals and not diverted elsewhere. The audit I'm advocating for would help clarify whether these funds are truly being invested in animal welfare programs or if they are being misallocated, as some reports suggest. It's crucial that we hold these organizations accountable and ensure that every dollar raised is making a tangible difference.
Your dream of a world where animal advocacy is no longer needed is not naive—it's an aspiration we all share. But until we reach that point, it’s vital that we scrutinize how resources are being used to ensure they are advancing the cause effectively.
Thank you again for your dedication to this cause and for engaging with these important issues.
Yes, I agree with you about the need for transparency within the nonprofit world. Sadly, for some, transparency is achieved to the minimum legally required. There's a need for nonprofits (including religious organisations) to be held to much higher standards of transparency. Further, we need to question whether society can and should rely upon nonprofits to address society's ills caused by industry and commerce. How we treat animals is a political issue and will only be resolved as political issues, alongside education, housing, employment, environment, healthcare, and so on. It's all interrelated. Further, government's contracting with nonprofits to provide products and services, including for animals, is problematic. And, yes, your call for increased transparency and accountability will help. But we need to push our thinking beyond we customarily believe.
Wow this is so needed. We need to know where our donations are going. Many times we just write a check because we love animals and want to see real progress. This is something we all need to check on and hold these organaztions to their promises. Transparency! Thanks for another great article!
Thank you, Adele. I'm pleased the article resonated with you. You are absolutely right, we as donors must demand evidence from these foundations that our gifts are actually going to their intended purpose.
Doesn’t that make common sense that every contract has a built in accounting, like any business? Also I believe the adoption number was 5,000 a year for Mission Hills contract and they only 3,000 - never accomplishing the contract. Plus rumours of transports from and to their refuge in Utah
Sadly, Paul, common sense is seldom common any more. I can assure you the contract called for 3,000 adoptions of city shelter animals. However, not only did they reportedly not achieve that number, they may have also violated the contract by bringing in animals from outside the City. The 5,000 number was for s/n surgeries and there are concerns that number may not have been achieved either. An audit would clear up all the uncertainty.
Great article! I learned about this issue from the ferret community. The issue was so bad that 3 women volunteered their time and established a Buck A Month club. All donations went to shelters and rescues💕
Thank you, Jasmine! It is so important that we understand where our hard earned donations are going. Here is another article on that point that you may enjoy:
Thank you for all your work on these issues.
Thank you, Tim, that is truly appreciated. Ed
Definitely need more scrutiny into some of these groups. Whenever we can donate directly to a cause rather than through a "middleman," it might be wise to do so. Additionally, I believe that when local taxpayers help fund or donate to organizations, they also have the right to sue if they believe funds are being mismanaged. I do know that the Animal Legal Defense Fund has worked with citizens and whistleblowers in the past to file suits.
So true, Annoula! I'm haunted by a report I heard recently that found donors don't care how their donations are used, they are only interested in the "good feeling" they get when they give. We certainly don't want to discourage people from giving and getting that good feeling, but we must find a way to encourage people to balance their giving with an evidence their gift will to to its intended purpose.
Ed, I agree 100%.
Every single orginization needs to be transparent, if you take our money provide proof of where it is being spent.
Amen, Dee Ann, from your lips to God's ears! It is time we, as donors, started holding these mega foundations accountable.
Thank you for this article and the others about LA. They make for a very disturbing read. I have worked full time in animal rights in various capacities since 1976. It's always been my dream that one day I will be out of a job as will everyone else who works in this sector. Our services will no longer be needed. The animals are freed from human tyranny. This may well be naive thinking. But it does beg the question: How cost effective are these organisations? In animal advocacy, there's an industry of organisations dedicated to effective altruism and supporting organisations that they deem to be cost effective. I have issues with their utiltitarian ideology and strategic approaches. But I digress...the point I need to get to is this. How come after all this money has been donated and bequeathed and spent the problem of companion animals in society persists?
Kim, thank you, friend, for your thoughtful response and for sharing your long-standing commitment to animal rights with the Animal Politics folks who I encourage to subscribe to your Substack.
Your concerns resonate deeply, especially when considering how much time, money, and effort have been dedicated to addressing the plight of companion animals, yet the problem persists. The question of cost-effectiveness is critical, and it's one of the reasons why this article calls for a comprehensive audit.
I believe that transparency is key to ensuring that donations are being used as intended—to benefit local animals and not diverted elsewhere. The audit I'm advocating for would help clarify whether these funds are truly being invested in animal welfare programs or if they are being misallocated, as some reports suggest. It's crucial that we hold these organizations accountable and ensure that every dollar raised is making a tangible difference.
Your dream of a world where animal advocacy is no longer needed is not naive—it's an aspiration we all share. But until we reach that point, it’s vital that we scrutinize how resources are being used to ensure they are advancing the cause effectively.
Thank you again for your dedication to this cause and for engaging with these important issues.
Yes, I agree with you about the need for transparency within the nonprofit world. Sadly, for some, transparency is achieved to the minimum legally required. There's a need for nonprofits (including religious organisations) to be held to much higher standards of transparency. Further, we need to question whether society can and should rely upon nonprofits to address society's ills caused by industry and commerce. How we treat animals is a political issue and will only be resolved as political issues, alongside education, housing, employment, environment, healthcare, and so on. It's all interrelated. Further, government's contracting with nonprofits to provide products and services, including for animals, is problematic. And, yes, your call for increased transparency and accountability will help. But we need to push our thinking beyond we customarily believe.
Thank you.
Thank you, Carole! I'm thrilled the article resonated with you.
Wow this is so needed. We need to know where our donations are going. Many times we just write a check because we love animals and want to see real progress. This is something we all need to check on and hold these organaztions to their promises. Transparency! Thanks for another great article!
Thank you, Adele. I'm pleased the article resonated with you. You are absolutely right, we as donors must demand evidence from these foundations that our gifts are actually going to their intended purpose.
Doesn’t that make common sense that every contract has a built in accounting, like any business? Also I believe the adoption number was 5,000 a year for Mission Hills contract and they only 3,000 - never accomplishing the contract. Plus rumours of transports from and to their refuge in Utah
Sadly, Paul, common sense is seldom common any more. I can assure you the contract called for 3,000 adoptions of city shelter animals. However, not only did they reportedly not achieve that number, they may have also violated the contract by bringing in animals from outside the City. The 5,000 number was for s/n surgeries and there are concerns that number may not have been achieved either. An audit would clear up all the uncertainty.
Great article! I learned about this issue from the ferret community. The issue was so bad that 3 women volunteered their time and established a Buck A Month club. All donations went to shelters and rescues💕
Thank you, Jasmine! It is so important that we understand where our hard earned donations are going. Here is another article on that point that you may enjoy:
https://open.substack.com/pub/animalpolitics/p/animal-politics-think-globally-give?r=14ocm4&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
You're welcome😊 Absolutely! I'll check it out🙂
Thank you! I will call attention to your message in a post this month
Thank you, Elyse, that is very kind of you!