Shelters & Adoption Rating Methodology
Shelters & Adoption Rating Methodology
Use this page to see how Animal Souls Beacon will compare shelter-policy coverage on paper before public scorecards are published.
This methodology explains the site’s own rubric for shelter and adoption policy. It is designed to make the scoring reproducible, readable, and easy to question rather than hiding judgments behind an unexplained number.
Read it together with the Policy & Legislation page. The methodology explains the scoring rules; the policy page shows the selected jurisdiction, the current coverage state, and any official-source items that are already published.
What this page covers
Published scoring rules: the disclosed index, scale definitions, weighting rule, and tier bands used on the Shelters & Adoption Policy & Legislation page.
Evidence standards: what counts as an official source, how uncertainty is handled, and why unverified criteria stay unverified instead of being inferred.
Versioning and score interpretability: how methodology changes stay visible so future shelter-policy scorecards remain interpretable over time.
Published methodology
Shelter & Adoption Policy Accountability Index v1.0
This index rates shelter and adoption policy coverage on paper. It compares the public rule structure a jurisdiction has enacted or published, not the live performance of every shelter or rescue within that jurisdiction.
Version
1.0
Last updated
Jun 22, 2026
Scoring rules
Each dimension is normalized as (points earned ÷ points possible) × 100, and the overall index is the mean of the published dimension scores.
Equal weighting across the seven published dimensions.
Changelog: Initial public shelters-and-adoption methodology published with seven dimensions and methodology-first coverage states.
0 · Absent or unverified
No official-source confirmation in the evaluated corpus, or the criterion is not present.
1 · Partial
The law or policy text partially addresses the criterion, or it does so in a limited way.
2 · Strong / explicit
The law or policy text directly and explicitly satisfies the criterion in a strong form.
Each dimension below is scored on this same 0–2 scale, criterion by criterion.
Illustrative only — no jurisdiction is scored yet
Worked example: reading one criterion across the scale
Because the matching Shelters & Adoption Policy & Legislation page does not yet publish a reviewed jurisdiction scorecard, this example is generic and non-attributed. It shows how the same criterion can land at 2, 1, or 0 without presenting any jurisdiction as scored.
2 · Strong / explicit
Official legal text directly satisfies the criterion in a strong form, such as an explicit reporting, hold-period, transfer, or complaint rule tied to shelter policy.
1 · Partial
Official legal text addresses the criterion in a limited way, but the coverage is narrower than the criterion asks the scorer to confirm.
0 · Absent or unverified
No official-source legal text in the reviewed corpus confirms the criterion, so the criterion stays unverified rather than inferred.
Seven dimensions
Transparency and reporting
Strong coverage requires public outcome or intake reporting, inspection or audit visibility, and meaningful access to data about shelter conditions.
- Public shelter outcome or intake reporting requirements
- Inspection, audit, or records-disclosure visibility
- Meaningful public access to the data needed to evaluate shelter conditions
Stray hold and reclaim pathways
Strong coverage sets clear stray-hold or reclaim procedures, owner-contact notice, and authority lines for where found animals should go.
- Clear stray-hold timelines or reclaim procedures
- Notice or owner-contact requirements tied to found animals
- Authority lines that define where found animals should go
Owner surrender and intake access
Strong coverage defines surrender access or limits, public-system intake obligations, and protections against arbitrary intake barriers.
- Rules affecting owner surrender access or limits
- Municipal or public-system intake obligations where relevant
- Protections against arbitrary intake barriers in public systems
Transfers, transport, and placement
Strong coverage addresses rescue transfer, inter-shelter movement, transport standards, and placement pathways that affect adoption access or time-to-safety.
- Rescue-transfer or inter-shelter movement rules
- Transport standards or licensing conditions tied to moving animals safely
- Placement pathways that materially affect adoption access or time-to-safety
Adoption disclosure and consumer protection
Strong coverage requires medical, behavioral, or prior-history disclosures, adopter protections or remedies, and accountability when an adopting household is misled.
- Disclosure rules tied to medical, behavioral, or prior-history information
- Public-facing adopter protections or remedy pathways
- Plain accountability when an adopting household is misled
Capacity, funding, and operational support
Strong coverage includes funding or capacity rules, operational support mechanisms, and tools that reduce avoidable shelter-system strain.
- Funding or capacity rules that materially affect shelter crowding or placement
- Operational support mechanisms tied to humane intake and care
- State or municipal tools that reduce avoidable shelter-system strain
Oversight, complaints, and accountability
Strong coverage provides complaint pathways, enforcement or corrective-action tools, and public mechanisms for resolving verified concerns.
- Complaint pathways, enforcement authority, or corrective-action tools
- Civil or administrative accountability when standards are breached
- Clear public mechanisms for surfacing and resolving verified concerns
Tier bands
Comprehensive · 80-100
Broad, explicit shelter-policy coverage across most published dimensions.
Strong · 60-79
Meaningful coverage with identifiable gaps, carveouts, or incomplete reporting tools.
Moderate · 40-59
Mixed shelter-policy coverage with several important gaps or narrow protections.
Limited · 20-39
Only limited structural coverage across the published shelter-policy dimensions.
Minimal · 0-19
Little confirmed structural shelter-policy coverage in the published rubric.
Evidence basis for scoring
Each criterion is scored from official-source legal text such as statutes, regulations, agency rules, or equivalent government-published records, with the citing section shown on a published scorecard.
Uncertainty lowers the confirmed score
Unverified criteria remain 0 instead of being inferred, and the score reflects law on paper rather than enforcement in practice.
Versioned for later interpretation
The methodology version, last-updated date, and changelog stay visible so scorecards produced under this rubric remain interpretable after later updates.