This chapter contains a review of field officer staffing, proposed staffing for the future, shift scheduling and current beat structure. The Study Team spent a total of 24.75 hours observing field personnel and their field working conditions. This time was allocated as follows:

• Kailua-Kona - 6 hours.
• Keaau - 12.25 hours.
• Waimea - 6.50 hours.

The importance of an Animal Control operation to a community is paramount. Whether measured by the number of Animal Control personnel involved, the portion of budget allocated to field services, or the reality that the Animal Control Officer has over 4 times more public contacts than a police officer, the field officer is the mainstay of Animal Control work. The way in which these individuals carry out their duties affects not only the quality of life for animals, but also the citizens’ perception of Animal Control.

The "First Amendment to the Agreement" between Hawaii County and HIHS, dated July 5, 2001, requires that "shelter facilities will be open to the public as follows (excluding County Holidays):

Oddly enough, the Agreement and the Amendment offers virtually no information on field staffing requirements, such as coverage times. The Study Team assumes that field hours coincide with dispatching hours, which are listed in Chapter 3, "Communications." It should be noted, however, that although a Humane Officer may be on duty during dispatching hours, these employees may be performing tasks not directly related to field work and are unavailable for routine animal-related complaints. As reflected in other areas of this report, the Study Team found it unusual to assign field officers to work in the shelter customer service and kennel areas.

After-hour emergencies (Priority 1 calls) are directly dispatched by a contracted answering service. The "cut-off" time for routine calls is typically 30 minutes prior to the end of the officer’s shift. As phone service continues until each shelter "signs-off," pending routine calls accepted after the "cut-off" time are queued in the system for a later response. Since HIHS does not respond to non-priority calls on those days when routine field service is not offered, some calls are allowed to "hold-over" until the next scheduled service day (or later). Policies defining current service delivery and complaint disposition appear within the HIHS S.O.P.

One field officer, from each facility, is designated as being "on-call" each evening and on those days in which field service is not offered. Each on-call officer is required to have a HIHS vehicle, badge, citation book and uniform while serving on stand-by status. During these periods, officers respond only to emergency calls meeting the following criteria (as reflected in Policy #26.00, "Emergency Services," of the HIHS S.O.P.):

• Animals in distress.

• Police request for assistance/service.

Person incarcerated with animals in possession.

Traffic accidents with animals in possession.

Owner deceased - animals need to be removed for safekeeping.

• Vicious animals.

Animals attacking people.

Animals attacking other animals.

Animals interfering with the duty of a police officer.

• Stray livestock.

When causing a traffic hazard.

Normally, an informal information exchange between field officers takes place before officers enter the field. There is no written policy which directs Humane Officers into the field within any specific time upon the commencement of work. HIHS officers typically begin each day working in the shelter, performing cleaning, animal care, euthanasia and office related tasks.

Once in the field, officers usually drop off impounded animals prior to lunch and at the end of their shift. Of course, officers may drop off impounded animals whenever needed (vehicles are at capacity, injured/sick animals, or weather conditions pose a threat to the animal). Workers receive a lunch break (30 minutes) and two 15-minute breaks. Officers return to their assigned shelter at the end of their shifts to impound animals and/or complete paperwork. Including the informal information exchange, shelter tasks, lunch break and shelter visits, HIHS officers typically spend only 4-5 hours in the field ("on a good day," one officer remarked).

A review of the current roster indicates that the agency has a total of 10 HIHS Officers on staff. This number is misleading, however, as these workers are not specifically dedicated to performing field work. In fact, some workers never venture into the field during the course of their shift, because of their shelter commitments. Field staffing is allocated for each shelter district, as reflected in the following chart:

Field operations is overseen by each individual Shelter Manager. These worker’s duties and responsibilities are offered in Chapter 4, "Shelter Operations."

The HIHS Officers are directly responsible for "responding to complaint calls from the public, conducting humane education, act as a liaison between HIHS and the public, and enforcing animal-related state and county laws." Their duties and responsibilities include:

• Responsible for all investigations involving infractions of animal related laws and ordinances. Issue citations when appropriate.
• Interview witnesses and suspects and complete all required paperwork including complaint logs, citations (if any), written reports and follow through until case is closed. Appear in court in support of prosecution when required.
• Responsible for the education of the public on issues relative to animal welfare, laws and ordinances.
• Reports for duty at the hours designated by the Shelter Manager.
• Insures that his/her issued equipment is in good condition and be prepared for the assignments of the day.
• Keep truck clean, polished and in proper working order at all times. Notify shelter manager of any mechanical or other problems with truck, keep accurate inventory of truck equipment.
• Required to be scheduled for on-call emergency service on a rotating basis.
• Process all animals brought into shelter from assigned route making sure to scan for microchip, check for tattoos, tag and log animals, complete intake forms.
• Responsible for opening shelter and/or locking shelter when assigned.
• Responsible for notifying the shelter manager of any major incident which may receive media attention.
• Required to know all animal-related state and county laws.

• Performs euthanasia on animals as required and responsible for dispensing proper dosages of euthanasia drug and tranquilizing drugs that may be used. Required to update and keep accurate logs and inventory of all drugs used.

• Responsible for performing all other related duties as directed or assigned.

The number of officers on duty, within any coverage area, is dependent upon staffing levels and assigned work responsibilities. Currently, the agency makes every attempt to respond to all service calls before the end of each day, however most routine complaints are allowed to "hold-over" till the next service day (or later).

The Study Team felt that the current hours for field operations were ineffective; shifts should include total weekday and weekend coverage, a later end time to daytime shifts, and some evening coverage during seasonal periods. In addition, Humane Officers need to be released from shelter duties and spend the majority of their time in the field. However, an increase in service cannot be introduced at current manpower levels.

Determining the optimum or desirable number of Animal Control Officers has remained an elusive goal for the profession. Several professional groups have tried to develop a model for justifying the desired level of officers. In some cases, this model appeals to budget officials and executives because of the apparent scientific approach to this issue.

Results, however, have been mixed. In some cites, the model has done nothing more than measure the volume of work and provides a basis for deploying personnel.

The service spectrum in each Animal Control department varies according to the management style and philosophy of the director, polices of government and community expectations. Where cities or agencies only count the calls for service within a community to determine optimum staffing, officer safety, citizen safety and major types of service delivery are not factored into overall staffing needs. In Animal Control work, enforcement responsibilities, population density and diversity, along with coverage area need also be a consideration for future planning.

Staffing which is determined solely on the ability "to respond quickly to a call" does not address a basic Animal Control responsibility - protection of people and animals. Policies, and in some instances, ordinances affect staffing needs. In cases where officers can give warnings or educate violators to prevent future occurrences, the officer has spared an animal the distress of impoundment or reduced the possibility of further violations. Attendance in court by officers also affects availability.

Although there is no universally accepted scientific methodology for determining the number of Animal Control Officers needed in any given jurisdiction, there are three models that are variously employed in determining an appropriate number of personnel.

• Some jurisdictions have attempted to evaluate the estimated growth in residential and business activity and predict the need for additional personnel.
• The use of comparative data from the National Animal Control Association Data Survey factoring in population, square miles served, and whenever possible, enforcement responsibilities.
• The "calls for service" model is used primarily as a workload indicator because the data represents a recognizable and readily measurable demand for Animal Control service. Comparing the number of calls for service from one jurisdiction to another, however, can be very tenuous, because of the variety of calls and the response to Animal Control efforts to encourage citizens to call on any perceived problem.

Determining the number of officers requires an assessment of citizen calls, officer-initiated calls, citations, written warnings, assisting outside agencies, the need for safety and security, a flexible beat structure, time spent on investigations, preventive patrol time and the specific types of service that the public wants and expects.

The basic elements of the "calls for service" model are as follows:

• Each 8-hour Animal Control position requires 2,920 hours to fill one shift for 365 days.
• Officer availability for staffing is determined by deducting from 2,080 hours (the maximum for one year), and the time required for vacation, sick leave, court time, "flex" days and training. In using this model, the average number of hours dedicated for Animal Control will be 1,832 hours (a standardized ratio), or 229 days.
• Determine the relief factor (relating to the number of officers needed to fill one position for the entire year) by dividing the number of days of work required for each beat area in a year (365) by the average number of days officers actually work in a year. In using this ratio, the 365 divided by 229 = 1.60 officers per day, per beat area.

The Study Team attempted to assess the approximate level of time committed by HIHS Officers to field duty. A detailed analysis is not possible because data was not presented for review. Based on current field officer deployment, officers typically spend 4-5 hours, per shift, in the field.

Distribution of Workload

Requests for service are separated into "priority" classifications. Priority 2 and 3 calls are described within a July 13, 1998, memorandum as follows:

• Running loose complaint; owner known.
• Animals in trap (weather O.K. and 24 hours has not elapsed).
• Follow-up on complaints.
• Dead animals in public right-of-way.
• Animal-related complaints.

• Owner surrenders (service fee).
• Random strays.
• Dead animals on the side of a roadway.
• Live animal trap on request.

During short staffing conditions, officers will take all priority calls, however low-priority calls maybe handled the following day (or later). The Study Team was not presented any data used to determine actual calls for service per beat area or the most requested calls for service. Recent fiscal year reports offer only "phone" statistics which do not reflect the number or types of complaints actually answered by field personnel. These phone statistics are listed in the following chart:

Officers are encouraged to "educate first" and "cite last," but all calls are primarily left to the reporting officer’s discretion. In general, the agency is more public-relations oriented than enforcement-directed. Service delivery appeared to be approached uniformly between most officers.

Officers are required to report to work at the moment their shift begins. There is no written policy which directs Humane Officers into the field within any specific time upon the commencement of work. Workers receive a lunch break (30 minutes) and two 15-minute breaks.

Vacation, sickness and court appearances will dictate shift support. Overtime is sometimes allowed and relief officers can be called in to assist.

As stated earlier, all field officers are supervised by the Shelter Managers, who may be defined by the Study Team as a mid-level supervisor. Both of these workers offer field support, whenever necessary. In addition, the Keaau shelter offers a Senior Humane Officer.

Policy 8.00 of the HIHS S.O.P. states that "when two or more Animal Control Officers are on the same scene the most senior or ranking member will be in charge."

It is a common practice in Animal Control work for field supervisors to assist in answering calls or backing other officers when call loads become heavy or manpower shortages occur.

Although the agency has identified 3 coverage districts, HIHS dispatches officers to calls anywhere in their jurisdictional areas. It is fairly common for dispatch to send field personnel from one area to another when the call satisfies the prioritization list or there is a shortage of manpower on any given shift. Staff members are provided maps (which details exact street locations) to assist in determining jurisdictional responsibilities. Since the agency is responsible for such a large coverage area, low-priority service calls are routinely held over for a response during a certain day of the week. While the Study Team understands the purpose of holding such calls (limited manpower, driving time, fuel costs, etc.), this practice is unusual and is not typically found in Animal Control work. Within most agencies, service call response is dictated by the priority of the complaint or the order in which the complaint was received, not by driving distances or an officer’s assigned coverage area.

The workload statistics reviewed by the Study Team did not separate calls by type, the most requested service call, or calls by county division.

No policy is offered which would require that personnel be routinely rotated into different districts. Currently, HIHS officers work in the districts in which they reside. Rotating zones gives officers a chance to become familiar with different areas of their service delivery region. Since limited information was presented regarding calls for service, it would be impossible for the Study Team to determine the equality of district boundaries.

An in-depth analysis of "calls for service" was not possible. No data was provided to the Study Team separating calls by type, the most requested service call, or calls by county division.

Limited information was provided to the Study Team on workloads, which represents a major data source for determining staffing levels within the agency.

Within HIHS, vacancies in all positions are posted as based on assigned responsibilities. Job requirements are assigned to each area. Vacancies are posted in-house and advertised outside the organization (newspaper, Internet classifieds, "First to Work" program) to attract qualified applicants.

Qualifications for the Humane Officer positions include a high school diploma or college degree (desirable); posses animal handling or veterinary technician experience, in addition to customer service experience; offer a professional demeanor; be a self-motivator; posses good oral and written communication skills; posses the ability to organize and prioritize work with a good problem-solving ability, with the ability to exercise good judgement; posses a valid driver’s license and clean driving abstract; and four years of paid work experience.

Previous work history ("telephone reference check") and education is verified, and criminal background checks are performed on Humane Officer applicants and any other position involved in the euthanasia process. Depending on the position, potential employees are also subject to a traffic abstract review. Physical examinations and/or drug testing are not required (however, during the course of the worker’s employment, he/she may be subjected to such an exam or testing). There are no special incentives to hire minorities or females. All applicants have the opportunity to review job descriptions prior to being interviewed.

HIHS officers are identified by titles and achieve certain levels of pay grades. Most Animal Control organizations have initiated a military type "rank" system, which can strengthen the chain of command within field operations. A ranking system gives recognition to long-term employees that receive no other benefits for their longevity. This acknowledgment also promotes more professionalism in the field. NACA has found that animal control/care organizations benefit greatly from this type of structure.

Information regarding field communications may be found in Chapter 3, "Communications."

Field Service Delivery Vehicles (FSDVs) are used by HIHS Officers to provide service response. The current fleet was described as follows:

The agency also owns a stock trailer for the transportation of livestock (this equipment is stationed in Waimea). The Mercury Tracer is primarily used by the Staff Veterinarian for travel among the 3 shelters.

Four of the FSDVs are outfitted with a "camper shell" which have been modified on the interior to transport animals ("vari-kennels"). Two other FSDVs offer a "home-made" commercial animal containment unit. A remaining unit offers a metal open shell, utilizing vari-kennels to confine animals. Most of these units protect animals from the elements and utilize open air venting and/or windows to provide fresh, outside air. No temperature gauges are offered within the cab of each truck to enable officers to monitor the interior temperature of the holding compartments. None of the FSDVs offer air conditioning in the animal holding compartments, thus animals may be exposed to extreme heat conditions.

The "home-made" units were manufactured locally by an unknown source. The units examined were not recognized as having been produced from a known vendor in Animal Control/Care work. The units showed signs of age and deterioration in several areas. Animals confined on these vehicles are not protected from the outside elements, as the open-air partitions (located in the front and back of each unit) allows rain to enter interior holding compartments. This same situation also exists with the vehicle offering the metal open shell.

For the most part, the vehicles are kept clean and in good repair, however some are in need of repair or replacement. The fleet color scheme (vehicles of varying colors) also seemed to be unusual and not consistent with other Animal Control/Care agencies. A fleet management schedule is not offered to replace vehicles once a maximum mileage range and/or age are achieved. Scheduled maintenance is performed by a private garage. Officers are responsible for maintaining all their vehicles and related equipment.

Impounded animals are confined on the FSDV’s. Officers are required to drop-off animals whenever needed, and at the end of each shift. No policy currently exists which dictate a set maximum period that animals are confined on the FSDV’s.

Officers typically unload impounded animals within the confines of the security fencing area. Should an animal escape, it would take some effort to recapture it, as the perimeter fencing covers a large area. In addition, the access gates to these areas are left open during operational hours, thus an escaped animal would be able to leave the facility grounds at-will.

As stated earlier, none of the FSDV's are equipped with air conditioning. Although the current method of transport (for the most part) protects the animal from the outside elements, animals may still be exposed to extreme heat. All the officers interviewed stated that they afforded animals special considerations during extreme heat conditions. While these units utilize open air venting and windows to provide fresh, outside air, these considerations are not a matter of policy. All containment units should be fitted with temperature gauges, which may be monitored by officers within the cab of each truck. If needed, air conditioners should be installed. In addition, a strict policy or mandate should be introduced regarding animal transport in HIHS vehicles.

The Study Team also expressed concerns regarding the "camper shell" models currently in use. The units inspected offer only 2 vari-kennel compartments. This limited holding area increases the likelihood that multiple animals may be transported within the same compartment, which encourages disease transmission and possible injury. The agency might consider purchasing commercially-produced animal containment units for each vehicle, as the "camper shell" models currently used by HIHS are not typically utilized in this profession.

Officers are required to clean and disinfect their truck after every unloading to prevent the spread of disease (not a matter of policy, however). The agency’s insignia and phone number appears on each FSDV. Public service announcements are not included.

Of the 7 FSDVs currently in the HIHS fleet, only 1 of these vehicles is equipped with a rotating amber light (which was clearly not impressive). Since many Animal Control related deaths involve personnel being struck by vehicles, NACA endorses the use of red or blue lights (preferably light-bars), where available for use by law. Otherwise, high-visible strobe-type lighting should be installed on all vehicles to increase visibility from the front and rear (the current trend in law enforcement is to utilize strobe-type lighting; HIHS needs to research the legalities of using red or blue lights, since laws vary from state to state).

Since Animal Control Officers typically have 4-times as much public contact as their police counterparts, it is imperative that personnel have access to safe and modern equipment.

Most safety equipment is provided by the agency, and designated employees instruct subordinates in their use. Eye protection, gloves (disposable and bite), snappy snares, catch-poles, muzzles, tools, traps, leashes, flashlights, cat graspers, and safety vests are provided to those employees who require this equipment. Although the agency offers each employee up to $50.00 annually for footwear, protective boots are not required. Personnel are responsible for "supporting and adhering to our (HIHS) safety rules and regulations, and for performing their duties in the safest manner possible." Officers are not allowed to carry sidearms or pepper spray, however batons are offered (the agency has recently placed an order for bite sticks).

It should be noted that the types and quantity of equipment varies among HIHS officers. For example, not every Humane Officer is issued a stretcher to assist in the transport of injured animals.

Designated staff members train entry-level employees on the use of equipment, and this training is documented via the "Individual Training and Education Record" (the Study Team was unsure if all the listed topics are covered during a recruit’s 6-month probationary period). The Study Team was advised that none of the field staff has received training regarding the use of chemical immobilization equipment. Employees are held accountable for materials utilized during their shift of duty (policy 19.01, "Use of County or HIHS Property" which appears in the S.O.P.).

Although there is an increasing threat of violence nationally to Animal Control personnel, none of the Humane Officers have been offered a bullet-proof vest to wear while in the field. Modern vests should be purchased and offered to all personnel as an added safety option. The Study Team found mixed employee reactions when addressing the vest issue.

Training needs are identified through the pattern of complaints, disciplinary action, performance evaluations, and areas of training interest expressed by the staff. New employees are offered an orientation before beginning work. After hiring, personnel are trained "on the job," usually being placed with designated training staff (senior employees) and/or rotated among several workers. The length of time varies among employees, depending on previous experience and work area. Workers are designated as "in training" for their entire 6-month probationary period before officially being discharged from the training program. The field training program was described as follows:

• 1^st Week - Recruit reviews paperwork with a senior officer.
• 2^nd Week - Stay in office; review policies, procedures and ordinances.
• 3^rd Week - Recruit observes and learns from other HIHS Officers. The recruit spends time with a senior officer, learning a variety of techniques and safety procedures.

Senior officers and/or a supervisor will continually observe recruits in action to gauge the recruit’s progress. In addition, the Shelter Managers are required to "ride-along" with all Humane Officers at least once annually in an effort to evaluate a worker’s performance.

Much of the training for field personnel is performed while "on the job" or sometimes through outside seminars or training conferences. Based on interviews and on-site evaluations, the Study Team determined that several employees posses adequate officer safety skills.

Additional information regarding training, the badging process, and "Rule 19" may be found within Chapter 2, "Administration."

All field personnel wear uniforms (a "golf" type" shirt and pants or jeans). The Study Team observed one basic uniform style during the course of the study period. Officers are provided shirts, trousers, a duty belt and footwear. While current policy requires that work shoes or boots "must provide protection against injury while the employee is performing his/her normal work duties," several workers were observed wearing footwear which affords little protection. Written regulations regarding "dress code" may be found in the HIHS S.O.P. and the Employee Manual.

Regulations also prohibit certain items from being worn on the uniform (such as hats). Policies also exist regarding hair, facial hair and hygiene. Uniform inspections are not routinely performed (if the Shelter Manager observes a problem, the officer is notified). Hats are not required to be worn.

Humane Officers are offered an annual $200.00 uniform allowance. Officers must clean their own uniforms. When uniforms show signs of wear, they must be replaced. Officers are not allowed to carry sidearms or pepper spray, however batons are offered (the agency has recently placed an order for bite sticks).

The Study Team felt that the agency should consider an upgrade of Humane Officer uniforms to reflect a more "enforcement" type appearance as is commonly found in Animal Control/Care work.

The Study Team had an opportunity to review enforcement procedures first hand. The weekday and Saturday shifts were observed.

HIHS is responsible for enforcing state statutes and County ordinances. Most of these offenses are classified by the Study Team as "animal ordinance violations." The responsibilities of the HIHS Officers are outlined within the HIHS S.O.P. and the job description. Humane Officers are not granted arrest powers, nor do they have the authority to carry firearms.

For the most part, the general public has some knowledge about animal-related ordinances or HIHS. The agency promotes its services and ordinance compliance primarily through field officers making public contacts, speaking engagements or media exposure. Since animal regulation is not solely the responsibility of HIHS, some Hawaii County citizens are confused as to which agency to contact regarding animal-related complaints. In fact, several HIHS employees and citizens alike stated that the County, the Police Department and HIHS could do a better job of informing citizens about animal-related issues. The Study Team observed a significant level of frustration among citizens during the on-site visit, which can be partly attributed to a lack of understanding, communication and cooperation between HIHS and the government itself.

HIHS’ primary enforcement responsibilities include most complaints involving only dogs, as cats are not regulated by the County. Animal bites, livestock complaints, and limited wildlife calls (primarily sick/injured or confined in a building and presenting a potential hazard). The agency has access to a stock trailer and has several areas available for the temporary quartering of small and large livestock. Exotic animals are the responsibility of the Department of Agriculture.

For the most part, the agency accepts all service requests dealing with nuisance dogs. Officers sometimes respond to nuisance cat complaints as a "courtesy" call. Field personnel will impound confined animals (including cats - for a donation), owner surrenders and investigate bites, cruelty, neglect and nuisance complaints. Response is determined by existing ordinance, the amount and quality of information available regarding the problem, the ability to respond based on workload and staffing levels, and the type of response requested by the complainant.

The Police Department is responsible for responding to any complaint of dog or cockfighting (HIHS provides support in these situations), and barking dog complaints.

HIHS also transports injured or sick animals. The agency offers the following policy regarding veterinary care (policy 14.00, HIHS S.O.P.):

When a member picks up a sick or injured animal, every precaution will be taken by the member when moving or transporting the animal so as not to compound its condition. A member shall attempt to make contact with the owner of an animal that requires immediate medical attention that is wearing something that provides a name, address or phone number. If contact cannot be made, the member shall take the injured animal to the most available veterinary clinic unless extraordinary circumstances, such as 1) a veterinarian is not available, or 2) the injuries are to such an extent, that in the member’s best judgement, the animal should be humanely euthanised.

When a member picks up a sick or injured animal, every precaution will be taken by the member when moving or transporting the animal so as not to compound its condition. An animal that is suffering painfully and is not wearing proper identification may be humanely euthanised. (End of policy)

Not every HIHS vehicle is equipped with stretchers or other similar devices to minimize damage in transporting an injured animal. Only injured livestock may be destroyed in the field (policy 14.05, HIHS S.O.P.).

The agency performs its own cruelty and neglect investigations (handled by regular shift officers), however only the Director of Operations has been actually certified as a cruelty investigator. All other field personnel have received training in-house or through outside seminars. The Hawaii County Police Department provides emergency backup for HIHS; not all of the officers interviewed felt confident with their service.

Most field personnel feel that HIHS is not aggressive with enforcement. The agency promotes education as a means of resolving problems, and citations are typically issued "only when necessary." At the time of the on-site study, a few officers were temporarily restricted from issuing citations because of a certification ("badging") issue. Without this enforcement mechanism, little would be offered in support of animal ordinances (and to encourage voluntary citizen compliance).

The lack of a computer-aided dispatching software greatly diminishes enforcement activities. Under the current system, prior complaints and infractions must me checked manually or the officer would need to have some personal recollection of the violator and the previous offense. In addition, addresses cannot be "flagged" for problem citizens. Written logs and/or a computer database is also used to track citations. Whenever officers issue citations in the field, they have no idea as to the violator’s criminal disposition since the agency does not have access to a criminal record’s database (access varies from state to state; it is fairly common in some areas of the United States for Animal Control agencies to have access to a criminal records database, usually when affiliated with a Police Department; such a database serves as a valuable tool in researching prior criminal convictions and outstanding warrants).

All officers are encouraged to educate first, then cite last. Issuing citations is left to the discretion of the individual officer. The agency offers the following policy (HIHS S.O.P.) regarding citations:

17.00 - An officer shall issue a citation for any violation of a law he/she is charged with enforcing and is committed in his/her presence. Complaint notices are only to be used when the owner is not home or unable to be located.

17.06(a) - Animal Control Officers shall include enough information on their copies of citations in order that any other person can understand the situation and location.

The Study Team was provided with the following historical data regarding citation statistics:

Officers are allowed to void citations under certain circumstances. There are no ticket quotas, and citation statistics are not utilized in any evaluation process. There is a written warning system currently in place:

• Complaint Notice - Typically issued when the violator is not available for contact.
• Notice to Comply - Typically issued when the violator is available for contact.

Field follow-up is only performed when time permits. In most cases, officers are required to provide follow-up on their own cases.

As stated previously, the Police Department is responsible for responding to certain types of animal-related complaints, both during and after HIHS operational hours. The following chart details the number of "official" reports handled by the Police Department, not including calls for service which are classified as "Miscellaneous Public Complaints":

The Study Team did have an opportunity to view officers in capture situations. While each officer has his/her own techniques or style, it appears that most field personnel have had some training in animal handling techniques and are confident in their own abilities.

Officers are provided most of the equipment needed to perform field functions, and backup is available (either by another Humane Officer or a police officer) when required. Of those observed, the Study Team felt that all of the officers (and shelter staff) observed treated animals in a humane and professional manner. No improper animal handling techniques were observed. The agency offers the following policy (14.01, HIHS S.O.P.) on humane animal handling:

"Animals shall be handled in a humane manner at all times. They should not be subjected to physical force other than as may be required in subduing the animals." (End of policy)

HIHS Officers are provided in-house training ("Basic First Aid") in animal first aid, however not every HIHS vehicle is equipped with stretchers or other similar devices to minimize damage in transporting an injured animal. Training is also provided on what methods are used to protect the handler from injury ("Safe Animal Handling").

The agency prohibits euthanasia in the field (except in the case of injured livestock), so injured/ill animals must be transported to the animal shelter or to a local veterinary hospital for evaluation.

The agency does not posses a tranquilizer system for the remote chemical capture of animals.

The Study Team determined that report writing within the agency is very common. The reports that are completed are inclusive of written information or research. Daily activity logs and reports are kept to document service calls. Officers also write narratives in support of investigations, confrontations or other unusual circumstance.

Officers complete field citations, warning notices, report logs, animal control reports, vicious dog notices and investigation reports. Most of those observed appeared to have some training in report writing and investigative skills.

The agency is responsible for enforcing ordinances pertaining to animal bites. Since rabies is not present on the island, animals are not quarantined for rabies observation. An investigation is initiated only if physical evidence confirms that a bite has occurred and the victim requests that the incident be reported. The primary purpose of documenting these cases is in regards to any possible litigation and to qualify a dog as "vicious."

The agency is not responsible for investigating wild animal bites. Instead, these cases are referred to local health officials for followup.

The Study Team was asked to make a recommendation regarding the processing of barking dog complaints. Currently, the Police Department is required to investigate noisy animal complaints, which involves a quantitative analysis by the reporting officer for testing the validity of a complaint. Some courts have questioned the legalities of Animal Control or Police involvement in such complaints because:

• Humans, by nature, have different levels of tolerance.
• Investigating officers do not live in the area, thus would not be disturbed.
• Identification of the offending animal by sound, not sight.

The Study Team feels that the burden of such complaints should rely heavily on the complainant. In most cities, the field officer acts as a "mediator" between the complaining party and the animal owner. Any legal action needs to be initiated by the complainant, either by signing a complaint through the field officer or the municipal attorney. The complainant should access the need to call his/her own witnesses for court to testify in their behalf. Any statements required should be made in front of a judge.

In conclusion, the field officer should attempt to defer legal action by mediating the initial grievance, however any future complaints should require a signed notice to appear in court from the complaining party. Here again, some courts have stated that because Animal Control or Police Officers do not live in the area, how can the dog disturb their repose?

Information regarding this topic may be found in Chapter 10, "Hawaii County Ordinance Review."

Courtroom Procedures

The Study Team was unable to observe courtroom testimony during the evaluation process. Field personnel were interviewed on delivery methods and techniques. HIHS is involved with the following court systems:

• 3^rd Circuit Court (state and county offenses)

Violations involve court dates and/or fines. Officers are summoned to appear when violations are contested and are allowed to interview witnesses prior to their testimony. Officers usually meet with the prosecutor just prior to the hearing, and are required to have all pertinent information/evidence available at that time. The Study Team did receive some complaints from HIHS officers regarding occasional difficulties in communicating with the Prosecutor’s Office.

Support from the Prosecutor’s Office was described by HIHS Officers as follows:

• Good support from prosecutor and judge in this area (Waimea).
• Average - really don’t know.
• It has gotten better; there used to be little interaction.
• Don’t get the support they need.
• Animal Control cases should be assigned to one prosecutor. Advantages: This individual would be more knowledgeable of animal-related ordinances, support Animal Control endeavors to urge owners to comply, expedite hearings, and assist in training officers in regards to the law and court demeanor.

Workers face disciplinary action for missing court appearances. Personnel are compensated for time spent in court and are required to wear their uniform or "business attire."

The majority of field personnel interviewed have received training in court testimony and on how to present evidence in court. A "Legal Seminar for the HIHS" has also been offered to provide instruction on county and state laws and the rules of search and seizure. Field records and any other information that officers need must be retrieved by the officer prior to court. For serious offenses, the Hawaii County Police Department is charged with storing evidence and maintaining the chain of custody. Other evidence is left in the Shelter Manager’s charge. Policy 16.00 of the HIHS S.O.P. (entitled "Evidence") details this process.

HIHS offers Polaroid cameras to assist in documenting serious crimes for evidence. The agency recently received a donation of a digital and video cameras.

In the judgment of the Study Team, a review and assessment of HIHS field operations indicates that the department is understaffed. A minimum of 1.6 field officers, per beat area and shift, should be offered in each area. Using the "calls for service" model, HIHS should increase weekday field staffing levels to 14.4 officers (the "calls for service" formula has been predominately used in Animal Control work over recent years).

The Study Team was unable to determine the desired number of personnel for any evening or weekend shifts, since the lack of data for "calls for service" (specifically emergency call-outs and complaint demand for those days in which routine field coverage is not offered) prevents a definitive recommendation on shift coverage.

It is obvious that district boundaries need to be redrawn in an effort to improve service response. Current district boundaries are much too large - field officers spend more time actually responding to the call, than at the scene. Data should be generated and analyzed in each County district area in an effort to ensure the equality of district boundaries. Here again, insufficient data prohibits the Study Team from offering any suggestions regarding district lines and officer deployment.

As manpower levels increase, the agency should introduce permanent weekend (both Saturday and Sunday) and limited evening field service. Once established, HIHS will also need to identify an evening and weekend field supervisor (or "lead"). At no time should any shift be left unsupervised.

All calls for service should be answered before the end of the day, regardless of their nature. The practice of holding calls until the next day (or later) does not reflect well on the department’s service delivery. The agency may be better served by attempting to distinguish what types of calls are selected for delayed responses, and for how long.

More efficient service delivery may be promoted by increasing manpower levels or eliminating certain types of calls.

The Study Team would recommend that HIHS hire additional shelter attendants and office personnel to release Humane Officers from these responsibilities. Utilizing these workers for shelter and office related duties is unusual and is not a common practice in Animal Control/Care work.

Those employees that require "badging" or recertification should be offered this training as soon as possible. Without this enforcement mechanism, little would be offered in support of animal ordinances (and to encourage voluntary citizen compliance).

5.01 With an increase in kennel staffing levels, HIHS should discontinue the use of field personnel in the kennel and customer service areas. Rating: 1

5.02 The agency should review and enhance its current policies defining specific service delivery tactics. Rating: 1

5.03 HIHS should annually review its call prioritization program to assure timely response to important calls and a reasonable response to non-priority calls. Citizens should be informed of the approximate time for calls that are not critical. Rating: 1

5.04 The agency should allocate enough field positions as to ensure the needs of citizens are met without undue delays. All calls should be answered before the end of each day. Based on the "calls for service" model, the agency should have a minimum of 14.4 officers on duty, for day-shift. Rating: 1

5.05 With an increase in staffing levels, HIHS should introduce full weekend and limited evening service, and a later end time to daytime shifts. Rating: 1

5.06 Any shift involving field personnel (except those that are on emergency stand-by) should be properly supervised. Any designated "lead" employees should be properly compensated for this added responsibility. Rating: 2

5.07 The agency should abolish its procedure of ignoring or pushing back any call for service until the next day (or later). If manpower levels cannot be increased, the elimination of some types of calls may improve service delivery. Rating: 1

5.08 Field personnel should be rotated into different zones every 90 days. The agency should also gather and review workload statistics to ensure the equality of district boundaries. Rating: 3

5.09 HIHS should maintain data calls for service per shift, per beat area and per officer. Rating: 3

5.10 The agency should develop a policy which would direct Humane Officers into the field within a specific time upon the commencement of work. Rating: 2

5.11 HIHS should phase-out all their animal containment units and replace them with a commercial model typically used in the Animal Control profession. All containment units should be fitted with temperature gauges, which may be monitored by officers within the cab of each truck. If needed, air conditioners should be installed. A strict policy or mandate should be introduced regarding animal transport in HIHS vehicles. Rating: 1

5.12 Older Field Service Delivery Vehicles should be replaced immediately. Rating: 1

5.13 The agency should identify someone within the organization to develop a fleet management schedule to replace vehicles once a maximum range and age is achieved. Rating: 3

5.14 The current fleet color scheme (vehicles of varying colors) is unusual and not consistent with other Animal Control/Care agencies. All HIHS vehicles should be repainted to offer a uniform appearance among the entire fleet. Rating: 3

5.15 Animal compartments should be cleaned and disinfected after every "unloading" to prevent the spread of disease. Rating: 1

5.16 A secured area should be identified for the unloading of animals. Rating: 2

5.17 Public service announcements should be predominately displayed on the outside of all vehicles. Rating: 3

5.18 The agency should explore the legalities of using red or blue warning lights on Field Service Delivery Vehicles (officers should not use these lights to run "hot" or abuse traffic laws - they are intended to be used in a non-emergency state as added protection and safety when working in high traffic areas). Rating: 3

5.19 The agency should solicit input from field personnel (not just supervisors) on what types of equipment upgrades they require. All equipment should be inspected regularly for damage/deterioration. Equipment should be issued to each individual officer. Stretchers or other similar devices should be purchased to minimize damage in transporting an injured animal. The agency should ensure that each individual officer is issued the same types of equipment. Rating: 2

5.20 Field personnel should be polled as to their acceptance of bullet-proof vests. This equipment should be purchase if endorsed by officers. Rating: 2

5.21 A structured Field Training Program should be introduced. Field personnel should be properly trained in report writing, officer safety procedures, court testimony and investigative techniques. All training should be documented. Certified training should also be obtained from an accredited Animal Control Academy. Rating: 2

5.22 Uniform apparel should be upgraded to provide an "enforcement look." Rating: 3

5.23 HIHS should offer specialized (promotional) positions to include a cruelty investigator. Such a position is common in larger Animal Control agencies and ensures the prompt handling and disposition of these types of service calls. Rating: 2

5.24 Those employees that require "badging" or recertification should be offered this training as soon as possible. Rating: 1

5.25 The agency should consider implementing a military-style ranking system for field personnel. Rating: 3

5.26 HIHS should implement an "on-call" risk policy for those employees that respond to emergency calls. Rating: 1

5.27 The agency should purchase a tranquilizer system for the remote chemical capture of animals. Anyone involved in the use of this equipment should be annually certified. Such certification should be well documented. Policies should also be introduced describing the situations which would require immobilization. Rating: 3