Fallout from Fast Track: Disease, Secrecy, and the Cost of Artificial Lifesaving Metrics

How a Best Friends–Funded Program at the Humane Society of Southern Arizona Unleashed a Preventable Disease Outbreak

When the Humane Society of Southern Arizona (HSSA) implemented its so-called "fast track" (pathway planning) program, the stated goal was to move adoptable animals more quickly through the shelter system and into homes. Funded by a $100,000 Best Friends Animal Society (BFAS) grant, the program also promised to rebuild relationships with rescues and incentivize the placement of harder-to-adopt pets. But recent events suggest a far more troubling outcome: a public health crisis, questionable medical practices, and growing concerns about the influence of national organizations on local shelter policy.

A Contagion of Consequences

On April 5, HSSA abruptly suspended all adoptions, intakes, and dog enrichment activities after confirming a case of Streptococcus zooepidemicus (Strep zoo), a highly contagious and often deadly respiratory illness. Volunteers were told to stay home. Adopters who unexpectedly showed up were reportedly required to don full-body protective gear. The shelter's veterinary clinic was closed for two weeks with no explanation. Internally, bordering kennels were filled with dogs on IV antibiotics, while others were reportedly treated blindly—without confirmatory testing—due to cost concerns.

According to reports from within HSSA, the outbreak originated from a transferred “fast tracked” puppy from either Maricopa County Animal Control or Pima Animal Care Center (PACC), a shelter with a known history of Strep zoo outbreaks. Unlike PACC, which typically manages such outbreaks with aggressive quarantine and deep-cleaning protocols, HSSA appeared unprepared, relying instead on reactive treatments and volunteer shutdowns.

Rushed to Nowhere: Victims of a System That Chose Speed Over Care

Behind the Curtain: The BFAS Connection

The shelter’s response to the outbreak was guided by leadership deeply rooted in BFAS ideology. HSSA’s CEO Kristen Barney, Chief Program Officer Michele Figueroa, and Shelter Manager Michelle Kleckner Santa Cruz, are all reportedly BFAS trained, and the Lifesaving Outcomes Manager position is BFAS funded. This concentration of influence raises questions about the extent to which BFAS doctrine shapes local policy.

BFAS has long promoted aggressive live-release goals, often encouraging shelters to reduce length of stay and increase transfers regardless of medical risk. Critics argue that these strategies, while statistically impressive, risk spreading disease and compromising the long-term welfare of animals.

With BFAS-trained personnel occupying nearly every key leadership role tied to this program, some critics see this as a cautionary tale in what communities partnering with BFAS can expect when statistical optics are allowed to trump operational integrity. In this instance, the cost of prioritizing speed over safety wasn't just operational—it appears to represent institutional failure. And the consequences continue to reverberate across the shelter, the animals, and the community.

Accountability and Transparency

This incident is not isolated. It's part of a larger pattern where live-release metrics are prioritized over ethical responsibility. When national organizations fund and influence local operations, are they also accountable for the outcomes? And when shelters like HSSA choose not to disclose the true extent of an outbreak—relying instead on vague volunteer notices and selective social media posts—their credibility erodes.

Further, the grant funding that enabled this program explicitly stated its purpose was to move animals into loving homes and support local rescues. But in practice, many rescues report the program has shifted into one of mass intake and rapid turnover, with little evidence of sustained rescue collaboration or transparency. If the funding is being used to mask failures rather than support success, both HSSA and BFAS must answer for how the program’s intent has been subverted.

A Cautionary Tale

The Strep zoo outbreak at HSSA is a stark warning of what can happen when ideology overrides infrastructure. Rapid animal movement without proper screening, quarantine, or medical oversight isn’t innovation—according to one critic “its negligence wrapped in a spreadsheet.”

HSSA’s experience reveals the downstream consequences of importing a one-size-fits-all model built on optics rather than outcomes. When entire leadership teams are trained in and beholden to the priorities of a national organization, the local community becomes a proving ground—and often, a casualty.

Until large organizations like BFAS recalibrate their strategies to align with real-world sheltering conditions—not just aspirational metrics—they risk repeating these failures wherever they go. The animals deserve better. So do the people who care for them.

Ed Boks is a former Executive Director of the New York City, City of Los Angeles, and Maricopa County Animal Care & Control Departments, and a former Board Director of the National Animal Control Association. His work has been published in the LA Times, New York Times, Newsweek, Real Clear Policy, Sentient Media, and now on Animal Politics with Ed Boks.

Stay Informed

For more analysis and updates on the evolving landscape of animal welfare policy, visit Animal Politics with Ed Boks.