Financial Assistance Programs
Introduction
In Indiana’s largest city, the number one complaint received by the Mayor's Action Center is regarding dogs
and cats, with more than 18,000 calls received each year.1 In 2012, Indianapolis Animal Care and Control
processed 15,614 animals. Approximately 8,000 animals were destroyed at Indianapolis’ two large animal
shelters. This scenario is repeated in cities and towns across Indiana. Because most animal care and control
agencies are not required to keep statistics on the number of animals taken in, adopted, euthanized or
returned to their owner, statewide statistics are difficult to determine.2
Poverty is statistically associated with high shelter intake rates, as poverty is linked to high pet relinquishment
and low spay/neuter rates.3,4 Financial Assistance Programs offer affordable spay/neuter options to pet owners
who live at or near the poverty level. Cost is a primary barrier to having surgeries performed, even in instances
where pet owners have access to low-cost spay/neuter clinics.5 Effective Financial Assistance Programs
provide surgeries at a cost of $20 or less and ensure that discounted services are only provided to pet owners
meeting income qualifications.6,7
By partnering with private-practice veterinarians and low-cost clinics to perform the surgeries, non-profit animal
welfare organizations can build a Financial Assistance Program with a network of surgery locations. A
multitude of locations helps overcome the barrier of transportation, which is a secondary obstacle to pet
owners at or near the poverty level.8
Financial Assistance Programs are under-represented in the world of animal welfare. These powerful programs
provide cost-effective solutions to animal overpopulation and can achieve dramatic results in reducing shelter
intake and euthanasia rates. Income-targeted Financial Assistance Programs are proven to be a core
component of any effective strategy to combat overpopulation.9
How a Financial Assistance Program Operates
A Financial Assistance Program is a collaborative effort involving a non-profit animal welfare organization,
private practice veterinary clinics, and low-cost clinics. Participating veterinary clinics agree to offer spay/neuter
services at a reduced fee, as specified by contract. Pet owners who meet income qualifications are allowed to
utilize the low-cost service and pay a nominal portion of the surgery cost. The animal welfare organization pays
the balance.
As the only statewide organization providing financial assistance to perform spay-neuter surgeries, SpayNeuter Services of Indiana (SNSI) partners with more than 100 veterinarians. Participating vets agree to
perform low-cost surgeries for pet owners meeting the criteria specified in the Spay-Neuter Assistance
Program (SNAP). The SNAP program serves pet owners who receive certain types of public assistance and/or
who live at or below 200% of the federal poverty level. Pet owners pay just $20 per surgery.
SNSI’s average reimbursement rate to participating vets is $76, as detailed in the table below. Clients pay $20
towards the cost, and SNSI pays the balance.
SNSI’s Veterinary Reimbursement Schedule
CATS
DOGS (no weight limit)
Spay
$60
Spay
$80
Spay, pregnant / in heat
$80
Spay, pregnant / in heat
$100
Neuter
$45
Neuter
$60
Feral: Male/Female Includes
Rabies vaccine & Ear Tip
$80
Special Circumstances:
SNSI will reimburse for Cryptorchid and
Pyrometra at the clinic’s published rate.
Feral: Female Pregnant
Includes Rabies vaccine & Ear Tip
$100
Average Reimbursement $76
Average Cost to SNSI $56
($76 minus $20 pet owner co-pay = $56)
Success of Financial Assistance Programs
As demonstrated in cities and states across the US, Financial Assistance Programs can achieve staggering
results in a relatively short time period. Consider the following examples:
Jacksonville, FL—Since launching the SpayJax program in 2002, the euthanasia rate in Jacksonville’s
shelters has dropped by 75%.10
Tampa, FL—The city achieved a 50% drop in euthanasia between years 2003 – 2011.11
Delaware—Within four years of launching its program (2006-2010), Delaware achieved a 48% drop in
euthanasia rates.12
New Hampshire—The state experienced a 30% euthanasia reduction in just one year (1994-1995),
and a 75% reduction in the first six years of its low-income pet sterilization subsidy program.13
What’s Needed to Guarantee a Successful Financial Assistance Program?
The most successful Financial Assistance Programs have five necessary components.14 SNSI’s SNAP
program meets each of these criteria.
1. They assist only pet owners and caretakers who genuinely need help with surgery costs.
Income targeting of pet owners is the most accurate and cost-effective means of serving pet owners in
need and decreasing shelter admission rates.15 The importance of properly qualifying pet owners in
need cannot be understated. The SpayJax program estimates that one targeted surgery can have as
much impact on shelter overpopulation as 50 to 60 untargeted surgeries.16
Geographic targeting is an indirect method of income targeting. Rather than qualifying applicants
directly based on income levels, geographic targeting focuses on areas with high poverty rates. But
rarely does the percentage of residents who live in poverty exceed 25 percent. The result is that the
majority of financial assistance goes to people who do not need it. The cost to run geographically
targeted programs is much higher than that of a true income-targeted program.17
Medicaid and similar government assistance programs are examples of simple and reliable indicators
of financial need. Recipients only need show a card to prove they are qualified. Income verification is
another method of qualifying pet owners in need and has the added benefit of including pet owners who
are working but who live on inadequate incomes and struggle to make ends meet.
2. They are affordable to low-income pet owners
Pet owners who are asked to pay more than a nominal fee of $10 or $20 to have their pet sterilized are
frequently unable to afford it.18 Even the reduced
spay/neuter rates offered by low-cost clinics are often too
SNAP serves pet
expensive for pet owners seeking to utilize these services.
owners who
Several Indiana low-cost clinics, including FACE, Low-Cost
receive one of
Spay-Neuter Clinic (Noblesville), SPOT (Cloverdale) and
eight types of
Pets Alive (Bloomington) routinely discount their surgery
public assistance
prices to meet the needs of pet owners who would
and/or who live at
otherwise turn away and not have their pet altered.
or below 200% of
the federal poverty
A national study concluded that income was the strongest
line.
single predictor of whether cats were spayed/neutered.
Only 51% of cats living in low-income households were
Download the SNAP application at:
altered, compared to 90% of cats in middle-income
www.GetThemFixed.org
households.19 The result of having unaltered cats has a big
impact on shelter intake numbers. New Hampshire reported
that almost half of the kittens surrendered to the shelter came from low-income households, even
though only 12% of families lived at this income level.20
Studies confirm that dogs living in low-income households are less likely to be sterilized than their
middle-income counterparts, but that they were sterilized at a much higher rate than cats. A 2008
survey conducted by the American Pet Products Association found that pet owners with annual
incomes less than $12,500 per year had sterilized only 54% of their dogs.21
Whether cat or dog, unaltered pets are more likely to be relinquished at shelters than their
spayed/neutered counterparts.22 Unaltered cats are more likely to migrate into feral colonies and
increase their numbers.23
3. They have adequate funding to sterilize a baseline number of animals for several years
The primary challenge of most Financial Assistance Programs is the ability to find adequate funding to
sterilize the number of pets needed to make a positive impact on animal overpopulation figures. SNSI
will facilitate more than 11,200 surgeries in 2014, with 7,780 designated for limited-income pet owners.
Although SNSI has provided an increased number of surgery certificates each year, the demand is far
outpacing SNSI’s financial capacity. SNSI could easily facilitate 20,000 surgeries for pets of limitedincome Hoosiers.
In addition to providing surgeries for limited-income pet owners, SNSI also funds surgeries for 501(c)
(3) animal welfare organizations and municipal shelters. Many of these organizations operate on shoestring budgets and/or rely on the generosity of volunteers who donate both their time and financial
resources to help animals in immediate need. For these organizations, covering the cost of spay/neuter
surgeries is often cost prohibitive. The demand for SNSI surgery certificates from this audience far
outpaces SNSI’s financial capacity.
The Pet Friendly license plate is the 8th best-selling
4. They are accessible to low-income
specialty plate in Indiana, generating revenue in excess
pet owners and caretakers
of $300,000 per year.
SNSI’s vet network is extensive, with more
than 100 clinics participating in Indiana. Pet
owners utilizing the Spay-Neuter
Assistance Program (SNAP) can make
their appointments with any participating
vet, minimizing the need to travel.
5. They have adequate surgical
capacity to meet demand
With more than 100 participating vets,
SNSI’s Spay-Neuter Assistance Program has adequate capacity to meet demand.
Cost-Effectiveness of Financial Assistance Programs
In addition to the benefits discussed above, Financial Assistance Programs are economical to operate due
to the low overhead costs. Programs can be run remotely, with staff working in various locations to process
paperwork and mail certificates. This structure
“Suggesting that we double the amount of
minimizes overhead by eliminating the need for
money we spend on preventive programs
added expenses such as paying rent and utilities on
may seem radical. It’s not. Continuing to
large buildings.
spend almost fourteen times more to
shelter and place homeless cats and dogs
than we do to prevent them from becoming
homeless in the first place is what’s
radical.”
Financial Assistance Programs cost much less per
animal to achieve results than other types of
programs, including those related to shelter
/adoption solutions. While both types of programs
drive down euthanasia rates, the difference is the
cost-effectiveness. A 1998 national survey of 186
Peter Marsh, Getting to Zero: A Roadmap
animal shelters revealed that these shelters spent
to Ending Shelter Overpopulation in the
an average of $176 for each animal they
United States
impounded. With a mere 39% of the impounded
animals being returned to their home or adopted
into a new home, the average expense for each
24
animal placed exceeded $450. Financial Assistance Programs have been shown to reduce both intake
and euthanasia rates at a cost of $50-$60 per animal.25
The New Hampshire Financial Assistance Program mentioned above resulted in a $3.2 million decrease in
impoundment expenses, while only spending $1 million on sterilization subsidies.26
Because sterilization programs help homeless animals, shelter animals, and household pets who may
become homeless in the future, these programs are also much more effective at ending homelessness
than adoption programs,
which only help shelter
animals.27
To most effectively address
shelter overpopulation and
euthanasia rates, a
comprehensive approach
must contain several layers
of targeted spay/neuter
programs at its base, as
illustrated in the Program
Pyramid. From there,
additional programs can be
added. If the base is
weakened, additional
programs will lose their
effectiveness.28
1
The Indy Channel, http://www.theindychannel.com/news/city-without-solution-for-horrible-animal-problem
2
American Humane Association, http://www.americanhumane.org/animals/stop-animal-abuse/fact-sheets/animal-sheltereuthanasia.html
3
Peter Marsh, Replacing Myth with Math: Using Evidence-Based Programs to Eradicate Shelter Overpopulation
(Concord: Town and Country Reprographics, 2010) 9-10.
4
(Frank, Cross program statistical analysis of Maddie’s Fund programs, 8.)
5
Peter Marsh, Getting to Zero: A Roadmap to Ending Shelter Overpopulation in the United States (Concord: Town and
Country Reprographics, 2012) 48.
6
Ibid., 52.
7
Ibid., 50.
8
Ibid., 52-53.
9
Handy, Animal Control Management, 38.
10
Target Zero Institute, http://www.targetzeroinstitute.org/#/faq/5057d106037c0d41c20001e5
11
Peter Marsh, Getting to Zero: A Roadmap to Ending Shelter Overpopulation in the United States (Concord: Town and
Country Reprographics, 2012) 50.
12
Ibid.
13
Peter Marsh, Replacing Myth with Math: Using Evidence-Based Programs to Eradicate Shelter Overpopulation
(Concord: Town and Country Reprographics, 2010) 23.
14
Peter Marsh, Getting to Zero: A Roadmap to Ending Shelter Overpopulation in the United States (Concord: Town and
Country Reprographics, 2012) 50-53.
15
Target Zero Institute, http://www.targetzeroinstitute.org/#/faq/5057d106037c0d41c20001e5
16
Target Zero Institute, http://www.targetzeroinstitute.org/#/faq/5057d106037c0d41c20001e5
17
Peter Marsh, Getting to Zero: A Roadmap to Ending Shelter Overpopulation in the United States (Concord: Town and
Country Reprographics, 2012) 50.
18
Target Zero Institute, http://www.targetzeroinstitute.org/#/faq/5057d106037c0d41c20001e5
19
J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 234 (8): 1023-1030
Peter Marsh, Getting to Zero: A Roadmap to Ending Shelter Overpopulation in the United States (Concord:
Town and Country Reprographics, 2012) 12.
20
21
Data collected for the 2009-2010 National Pet Owners Survey (APPA) but not included in the report.
22
Peter Marsh, Getting to Zero: A Roadmap to Ending Shelter Overpopulation in the United States (Concord: Town and
Country Reprographics, 2012) 34.
23
Ibid., 19-20.
24
Peter Marsh, Getting to Zero: A Roadmap to Ending Shelter Overpopulation in the United States (Concord: Town and
Country Reprographics, 2012) 27.
25
Target Zero Institute, http://targetzeroinstitute.org/#/faq
26
Handy, Animal Control Management, 38.
27
Peter Marsh, Getting to Zero: A Roadmap to Ending Shelter Overpopulation in the United States (Concord: Town and
Country Reprographics, 2012) 29.
28
Target Zero Institute, http://www.targetzeroinstitute.org/#/faq/5057d106037c0d41c20001e5