Browse
Search
Agenda - 11-19-2002-9a
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2000's
>
2002
>
Agenda - 11-19-2002
>
Agenda - 11-19-2002-9a
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/1/2008 11:51:28 PM
Creation date
8/29/2008 11:13:28 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
11/19/2002
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
9a
Document Relationships
2002 S Manager THE ANIMAL PROTECTION SOCIETY OF ORANGE COUNTY, INC. Contract for External Evaluation of Orange County Animal Shelter
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Contracts and Agreements\General Contracts and Agreements\2000's\2002
Minutes - 20021119
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2000's\2002
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
21
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
~o <br />• Records-keeping <br />• Rules codification and review <br />• Governing structure <br />• Methods for assuring continuous public feedback into the process <br />• Structure of the APS Board to include BOCC representative <br />• BOCC definition of values/goals/objectives necessary to animal sheltering services <br />The Board of Health Animal Control and Environmental Health Committee discussed at length <br />how to encourage diverse members of the public in providing input so that it will be useful in <br />moving forward with future changes in animal sheltering operations. The descriptions of the <br />external assessments from both organizations seemed to consider public input but not to the <br />extent that seems to be of interest here. <br />The Board of Health Committee is recommending that a public process focus on <br />• A future orientation <br />• Input from the entire county <br />• Include both interpersonal and written input methods (focus groups, key informant <br />interviews, and/or surveys) <br />And that the content be focused on <br />• Services expected from the shelter <br />• Top three goals for the shelter <br />• Description of good customer service <br />The Committee would encourage hiring a paid facilitator (perhaps through Dispute Settlement <br />Center) to identify and group major areas of concern by staffing two focus groups, one in <br />northern Orange and one in southern Orange. The Committee felt that having this done prior to <br />the external consultant starting their analysis might provide additional public input and focus to <br />the consultant's assessment. <br />In examining the descriptions of the services offered by the HSUS or the AHA, the Committee <br />did not feel there was adequate information to make a recommendation of one organization <br />over another. Staff was directed to solicit comments by some of the references listed in the <br />HSUS consultation description and to contact AHA for similar references. The Reference <br />Check Report (attached) provides details on the conversations with four HSUS clients. HSUS's <br />evaluation for the city of Sacramento California is also available online at the following website: <br />www.pw.sacto.org/animalcare/. It is clear from all the references that specific recommendations <br />for improvement are included in each HSUS report as well as an extensive analysis. Key <br />stakeholder interviews are a part of their process. <br />AHA has been slower to respond to our request for references. AHA's Program Director noted <br />to Mr. Sauls in a telephone conversation that AHA's consultation program was best used if an <br />agency could specifically identify an area needing improvement. AHA is not accustomed to <br />comprehensive organizational assessments and suggested that HSUS is more accustomed to <br />the comprehensive approach. <br />The APS Board of Directors at their October meeting expressed their willingness to request an <br />external assessment of the shelter operations and also has no problem with either organization <br />proposed. They have expressed a willingness to make changes in the shelter operations; some <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.