THS (Toronto Humane Society) 2008 AGM (Annual General Meeting)

(1) Revenue & Expenditure Statement (page 2)

The Society is to be congratulated on our change in fortunes from 2006 to 2007; Legacies & Bequests are up $2,000,000. Further, another kudo to the Society for increasing expenditures to Subsidized Veterinary Care and the Spay and Neuter Clinic.

Let's look at 6 other items beyond the success stories. Before we do, Chair – Would you agree that the significant portion of expenditures are to pay human resource costs (staff salaries)?

(A) Then, Animal Care and Shelter Services (Expenses – line 1) has dropped (by $100,000).

(B) Then, General and Administration (Expenses – line 4) has dropped (by $300,000).

Why have such essential services been reduced in a year which saw a $2,000,000 increase in Legacies & Bequests?

(C) Then, Education Programs are reduced by 50% (Expenses – line 5). Why?

(D) Yet, the Investigation Department (Expenses – line 6) has increased. Why is this so when the statutes – the law - for the Province of Ontario (under the OSPCA Act) give a clear mandate to the OSPCA (Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals) to be the investigative body? Is there some reason why the Society is exceeding its mandate and creating duplication, overlaps & ultimately confusion in this essential area of animal care?

(E) The Fundraising lines need to be compared (Revenue to Expenditure) to be fully realized.

In 2006, the Society spent $2,804,699 to raise $7,320,087 = 38% to expenses = $.38 of each dollar donated going to administer the fund-raising.

In 2007, $2,729,822 was spent to raise $7,566,013 = 37% to expenses = $.37 of each dollar donated goes to administer the fund-raising.

Further, these line items exclude Legacies and Bequests.

Such fundraising expenses are excessive. If one looks at the United Way model, one of the most successful fund-raising models in the world, volunteer leaders from the private and public sectors do the canvassing to substantially reduce overhead to 10-15%. Yet we are double or triple in fundraising expenses held up to that threshold. The Society model is one of paying telemarketers instead of using the human talent of successful volunteer leaders who love animals. Why has that pool of human talent been ignored by the Society to insure that each charitable dollar raised for animal care goes farther?

(F) Finally, where are Legal Fees recorded? Any public domain search of court records shows the THS to be a litigious organization – from suing the Hamilton Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals to almost a dozen other active cases. The frequency with which “THS vs ...” occurs in such court searches is outrageous for a not-for-profit Corporation. Is all the legal work to be believed as pro bono?

(2) External Funding Opportunities Missed

(A) The OSPCA (Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals) reports their success in receiving $5,000,000 in capital grants for building projects ($3.75 million) & information technology improvements ($750,000) for application & allocation to their affiliates. Since the THS is an OSPCA affiliate, the Society would be eligible to apply. It's puzzling that no application has been made from Ontario's largest OSPCA affiliate. Why is this? Might we assume that the CRA threshold for eligibility including financial disclosures cannot be met by the Board? Or is it simply Board indifference and apathy to such an excellent opportunity?

(3) Treatment of Staff

(A) There always seems to be advertisements for staff vacancies at the Society. Such opportunities are seen in the Newsletters to Members and on electronic job opportunity websites.  Why is there such a large turnover in staff? Does the Society have a balance of both new young workers and mature workers in equal proportion? Part-time and full-time staff in equal proportion? When I visit the River Street Facility, this is not my impression?

(B) Is there a formal Employee Recognition Program?

(C) I'm puzzled about job applications coming to the Board Chair in the advertisements? Doesn't the Society have an HR (Human Resources) professional to receive and process applications as well as develop a balanced human resource delivery model inquired about above? When governance and operational people cross boundaries, wasted energy, overlap of duties and confusion results. When will policy and the big picture become the Chair and the Board's appropriate domain while operational matters and day-to-day activities rest with staff, accountable to the Board through the Society's policies but not micro-managed by the Chair and Board?

(4) Board Governance

In 2001, the THS Board sued then-Board Vice-President, Joan Milne and won a judgment against her for improprieties in how an AGM was called. How does she continue to serve as an active Board member in light of that judgment & further, be recommended for a continuing term?

LINDA MacKINNON

THS AGM Handout (October 1, 2008)