Debrief 1: The Shelter Design of the Greenville Humane Society
https://www.animalsheltering.org/blog/good-shelter-design-good-animals
Animal Sheltering is a magazine by the Humane Society of the United States, a national organization that combats animal cruelty through rescues, advocacy-through-education, and care services for animals in crisis.
For this debrief, we’ll be focusing in on the environments and communications design of their Greenville, South Carolina Shelter. Let’s get some of the logistics out of the way.
- The Greenville Humane Society (GHS) partnered with McMillan Pazdan Smith Architecture for the architecture, planning, and interior design of the shelter. The firm took a design-led approach to the project.
- While we don’t know their exact budget for the project, we do know that the Humane Society of the United States, a parent organization, funded the project.
- We’ll talk about the specifics of impact later in the debrief, but, for reference, they used the metrics of flow-through, revenue, logged volunteer hours, adoption rate, foster length-of-stay, and euthanasia rates.
- This was a two-year project whose first phase finished in Fall 2018.
A problematic cycle
All shelters face the problems of overcrowdedness, reductions of numbers without euthanasia, and high numbers of weekly foster intakes. With these issues comes concerns of hygiene, the spread of diseases, and stressed animals.
With this problem space in mind, McMillan Pazdan Smith Architecture sought to design a space that contributed to the experiences of shelter staff and visitors alike. They focused in on the flow of foster traffic through pet shelters, as this metric provided context for their decisions in designing for other cascading metrics. They found that all in-house stakeholders all desired to minimize lengths of stay of pets.
Their design opportunity:
[Can the] physical design of a shelter significantly support the management process by promoting the idea of flow-through?
What does it mean to be a shelter?
Could a pet shelter be a place where people want to spend time with their pets, rather than just a place to get a new pet? With that thought in mind, McMillan Pazdan Smith Architecture saw an opportunity to merge the everyday lives of pet owners with the mission and goals of shelter staff.
They spitballed ideas centered around social innovation. Maybe the shelter could sell products and provide low-cost surgeries. It could even host local events multiple times a month to sustain community engagement.
Everyday experience starts at the front door, so the designers took one step back and started brainstorming what the outside of a shelter could look like.
“[We focused on] carving out as much space as possible for people and animals to gather — even a porch or yard or walking trail — creating spaces where animal lovers can see animals on a regular basis.”
An engaging introduction to a shelter space leads to higher adoption rates while new, relevant services can create new streams of revenue.
Impact from this focus (words by Casey Perkins):
- GHS net retail income was up by 103 percent in the first two years in the new building (hitting over $100,000/year for first time in GHS history in 2012), and gross income from GHS low-cost spay/neuter surgeries increased by 134 percent in the first two years (over $126,000 for 2012).
- Birthday parties at GHS generated over $15,000/year within the first two years.
- More than 45,000 volunteer hours were logged at GHS for the second year in the new building.
Getting fosters in, and out.
Holding capacity isn’t the only problem: more space means a higher quantity of animals can be fostered, but that doesn’t solve the problem of flow. Instead, could a space be designed to help shelter staff manage quantities over time? In response, they designed features of the space behind the psychology that “less options can lead to quicker decision-making.”
They also thought about the modularity of their spaces — a holding pod, for example, should be able to work for adoptions, holding, quarantine, or any combination of the above.
Impacts (words by Casey Perkins):
- ACAS adoptions went up by almost 40 percent in the first two years and had almost doubled within two more years.
- GHS adoption revenue increased by 22 percent in the first two years in the new building.
- GHS length of stay for adult dogs is currently one to two weeks versus one to two months in the previous facility. Length of stay for puppies is currently two days versus one to two weeks in the previous facility.
Productivity for shelter staff members
Shelter staff need to be able to work quick, otherwise a normal work day could turn into overtime. For the GHS, the Humane Society’s designers needed to ensure that the layout of the building optimized workflow. Things were placed where staff needed to have it placed — this led to higher success in flow-through.
Impacts (words by Casey Perkins):
- ACAS euthanasia rate within two years of moving into the new building had dropped by roughly half. Within the next two years, it dropped by half again.
- Historically and prior to the move in 2013, ACAS euthanized over 70 percent of the animals it received. For 2017, this number was under 18 percent.
- GHS is so successful at flow-through that it pulls animals from 11 other South Carolina public shelters just to keep up with demand.
Our Reflection
Why this project now?
Shelters face a problematic cycle of flow-through. With more fosters coming than being adopted, shelters start to slow down in productivity. Staff members need to keep the same amount of the time they spend for each animal, but a rising quantity of animals makes that mission increasingly hard.
The environments design of shelters need particular attention, as these facilities are a central node to the systematic problem.
Did they define it as social innovation? Do you agree?
The architecture firm works closely with local partners, and it aims to “create environments that embody their personalities, enrich their lives, and enhance the quality of their community.” We can imply that a huge part of this project was to contribute to Greensville as much as it was to impact the adoption process.
Why is this case study/research relevant to your project?
Shelters form the backbone of our wicked problem. Understanding how a firm had previously impacted the social and economic in a local place through the e-design of a shelter gives us a foundation for how we can approach this problem in Pittsburgh.
Debrief 2: Petfinder
https://www.petfinder.com/ & https://petfinderfoundation.com/
Why this project now?
Petfinder’s mission is to use technology to increase public awareness of the availability of high-quality pets, increase the adoption rates to avoid euthanasia, and elevate the status of pets. This project was founded in 1996 and seems to evolve in efficiency with the improvement of technology. Petfinder is effective as a project now as it allows for people to do effective research and find potential pets while surpassing barriers such as having to travel to different shelters and foster homes to know which pets are available as well as keeping up-to-date information from all of these different sources.
What was their concept? Who were the key partners?
Petfinder is a website and application that allows potential owners to see information about homeless animals around their area. Petfinder also includes a list of resources/articles/etc. to help new owners care for their pets and understand the commitment. Petfinder allows non-profit organizations such as shelters to register with them and include the information on available pets on the site. Additionally, Petfinder is partnered with the Petfinder foundation, Purina, Volvo, Orvis, and Extended Stay America.
Was this project lead by design?
While this project seems as though it was more lead by technology, focus on the design of the website helps in making the experience of adopting a new pet more efficient and reliable. The way that information is organized on the page (not only for the types of pets available for adoption but also for articles and resources for new pet owners) definitely seems more friendly and familiar than some other websites that attempt to do similar things.
How was it applied?
Petfinder has a desktop website and a mobile application that have very similar functionality. Additionally, Petfinder grants access to their API so that other developers can help to extend their reach on different websites. Additionally, Petfinder has free widgets and graphics that can be easily downloaded and shared on websites as well to increase the reach that these homeless pets have.
How much did it cost?
While it is not clear how much it costs to create and host the project, Petfinder relies on animal welfare volunteers, who all have other jobs/commitments outside of maintaining the website.
How was the impact measured?
The Petfinder Foundation’s main mission is to “help ensure that no adoptable pet is euthanized for lack of a good home”. The Petfinder Foundation shares its impact through success stories on their foundation website, that list different programs and events and how many animals were helped through each. Although there doesn’t seem to be an updated number of overall pets helped, this list of stories goes to show how many different animals and areas were impacted and reached by the Petfinder Foundation.
Did they define it as social innovation? Do you agree?
Petfinder and the Petfinder foundation does not define itself as a social innovation. While I do not think I would solely define them as a social innovation, I believe that Petfinder helped and is successful through bringing people together with a shared goal: helping homeless animals have long lasting forever homes.
Why is this case study/research relevant to your project?
This case study is directly relevant to our project as its main mission is to improve the lives of homeless animals through the consolidation of information. Petfinder helps to make the process of adopting pets more efficient and accessible, which is similar to the goal we have for our own project.
Debrief 3: Best Friends (Resources)
Why this project now?
Best Friends Resources is a collection of pet care info & articles from experts, with the goal of providing new & potential pet owners ways to learn how to best take care of their pets. It reflects the less glamorous side of the adoption & pet-owning process: to fully ensure that pets have the best homes possible (and don’t get returned to shelters), owners must also have the knowledge to make informed decisions & take proper care.
What was their concept? Who were the key partners?
Best Friends started out as an animal sanctuary in the 1980s, and grew into a much larger network whose goal is to end the killing of animals in shelters, both by encouraging spaying/ neutering programs and increasing the number of people who adopt from shelters. Through their work as a sanctuary, outreach, and partnerships with both local and national organizations Best Friends has launched several No Kill initiatives in various cities across the United States. A more in-depth look at key steps can be found here. Best Friends eventually launched their Resources section to help with their goal of increasing the number of people adopting from shelters, by giving those people information to be the best pet owners possible.
Was this project lead by design? How was it applied?
The original project was very much thrown together, trial-and-error by founding members with a wide range of skills, who ended up having to teach themselves a lot about everything from how to build facilities for animals to how to reach out to communities that were also passionate about pets.
How was the impact measured?
Overall, Best Friends looks at the number of shelter animals killed annually. This number has dropped from 17 million in 1984 at their founding, to around 733,000 in 2019.
Did they define it as social innovation? Do you agree?
The language used obviously never treats it as such, but for all intents and purposes Best Friends’ processes are social innovation. It has a fairly clear goal for improving issues in society, and has worked towards employing many different methods and mobilizing communities towards that cause.
Why is this case study/research relevant to your project?
Broadly, Best Friends provides examples of clear benchmarks to consider (measuring progress), as well as examples of several different strategies and partnerships all working towards that same goal. The Resources section in particular could be helpful as reference for our issue, as we’re not only looking to increase pet adoption by better matching pets and owners, but also by making sure people have the full awareness and knowledge they need to become pet owners.
