Animal Welfare Professionals

Housing is an animal welfare issue. We all kind of know this. But I don't think most of us have looked at the numbers closely enough to understand the scale.

PIHI (Pet-Inclusive Housing Initiative) published data showing that 74.7% of pet-owning renters cause zero property damage. Of the remaining 25%, 88% of that damage is under $250. We are talking about a problem that largely does not exist in the way landlords think it does.

Meanwhile, when renters with pets can't find housing, 22.7% rehome their animal and 14% hide their pet entirely (which creates its own set of welfare risks). Another 23.4% declare an ESA, which is often just a workaround for restrictive policies, not a reflection of actual disability accommodation needs. That ESA loophole frustrates landlords and makes things worse for people who genuinely need service or support animals.

Here is what we are doing about it at Animal-Angels Foundation. We built a Pet Resume system through our AWRN (Animal Welfare Resource Network). Instead of breed labels, which tell you almost nothing useful about an individual animal, the resume gives landlords verified data: behavior profile, training history, health records, and rental track record. We pair that with an Anti-Damage Prevention Kit during onboarding and ongoing Bridge support if a housing crisis hits.

The pitch to landlords is simple. Pet-inclusive properties see 80% renewal rates and 70% occupancy compared to market averages. In a market with 6.9% vacancy rates nationally and 37% of properties offering concessions, that is a real competitive edge. And when you reduce ESA workarounds by just being inclusive from the start, you reduce the friction that drives landlords to ban pets in the first place.

The harder question for our field: how many of us have a housing intervention in our prevention toolkit? We talk about behavior support, spay/neuter access, food assistance. Those matter. But if a family loses their apartment over a pet deposit or a breed restriction, none of that other work matters because the animal still ends up in a shelter.

We are still early in testing this with landlords in our seven-county service area. I don't have outcome data to share yet. But the research is solid, and the gap in our field is real.

Who else is working on the housing side of this? I would love to know what is working, what is not, and where you are getting pushback from property managers.

This is such great and helpful data and important work, thank you!

I'm very interested to hear how landlords react. I'm sure some will be reasonable and open - I hope so! A lot of these housing policies are also masks for racism/classism, and I fear not everyone will be swayed with data and solutions, because it's not really about the dogs, but who is perceived to own them. Running an organization focused on pit bull-type dogs, I hear a lot about how breed discrimination in housing has become a legal form of redlining.

EVERYONE deserves the love of an animal and to be able to keep their furry family members, regardless of how much money they make. The NY governor just vetoed a bill that would have prohibited renters insurance companies to discriminate based on breed - even though a law like that already exists for homeowners! So essentially, denying folks who rent rather than own the same rights. It's infuriating and complicated.

So glad to learn about another organization pushing back with facts, concrete solutions, and a commitment to keeping pets with their people. Thank you and looking forward to learning more!

Housing is an animal welfare issue. We all kind of know this. But I don't think most of us have looked at the numbers closely enough to understand the scale.

PIHI (Pet-Inclusive Housing Initiative) published data showing that 74.7% of pet-owning renters cause zero property damage. Of the remaining 25%, 88% of that damage is under $250. We are talking about a problem that largely does not exist in the way landlords think it does.

Meanwhile, when renters with pets can't find housing, 22.7% rehome their animal and 14% hide their pet entirely (which creates its own set of welfare risks). Another 23.4% declare an ESA, which is often just a workaround for restrictive policies, not a reflection of actual disability accommodation needs. That ESA loophole frustrates landlords and makes things worse for people who genuinely need service or support animals.

Here is what we are doing about it at Animal-Angels Foundation. We built a Pet Resume system through our AWRN (Animal Welfare Resource Network). Instead of breed labels, which tell you almost nothing useful about an individual animal, the resume gives landlords verified data: behavior profile, training history, health records, and rental track record. We pair that with an Anti-Damage Prevention Kit during onboarding and ongoing Bridge support if a housing crisis hits.

The pitch to landlords is simple. Pet-inclusive properties see 80% renewal rates and 70% occupancy compared to market averages. In a market with 6.9% vacancy rates nationally and 37% of properties offering concessions, that is a real competitive edge. And when you reduce ESA workarounds by just being inclusive from the start, you reduce the friction that drives landlords to ban pets in the first place.

The harder question for our field: how many of us have a housing intervention in our prevention toolkit? We talk about behavior support, spay/neuter access, food assistance. Those matter. But if a family loses their apartment over a pet deposit or a breed restriction, none of that other work matters because the animal still ends up in a shelter.

We are still early in testing this with landlords in our seven-county service area. I don't have outcome data to share yet. But the research is solid, and the gap in our field is real.

Who else is working on the housing side of this? I would love to know what is working, what is not, and where you are getting pushback from property managers.

This is such great and helpful data and important work, thank you!

I'm very interested to hear how landlords react. I'm sure some will be reasonable and open - I hope so! A lot of these housing policies are also masks for racism/classism, and I fear not everyone will be swayed with data and solutions, because it's not really about the dogs, but who is perceived to own them. Running an organization focused on pit bull-type dogs, I hear a lot about how breed discrimination in housing has become a legal form of redlining.

EVERYONE deserves the love of an animal and to be able to keep their furry family members, regardless of how much money they make. The NY governor just vetoed a bill that would have prohibited renters insurance companies to discriminate based on breed - even though a law like that already exists for homeowners! So essentially, denying folks who rent rather than own the same rights. It's infuriating and complicated.

So glad to learn about another organization pushing back with facts, concrete solutions, and a commitment to keeping pets with their people. Thank you and looking forward to learning more!

Housing is an animal welfare issue. We all kind of know this. But I don't think most of us have looked at the numbers closely enough to understand the scale.

PIHI (Pet-Inclusive Housing Initiative) published data showing that 74.7% of pet-owning renters cause zero property damage. Of the remaining 25%, 88% of that damage is under $250. We are talking about a problem that largely does not exist in the way landlords think it does.

Meanwhile, when renters with pets can't find housing, 22.7% rehome their animal and 14% hide their pet entirely (which creates its own set of welfare risks). Another 23.4% declare an ESA, which is often just a workaround for restrictive policies, not a reflection of actual disability accommodation needs. That ESA loophole frustrates landlords and makes things worse for people who genuinely need service or support animals.

Here is what we are doing about it at Animal-Angels Foundation. We built a Pet Resume system through our AWRN (Animal Welfare Resource Network). Instead of breed labels, which tell you almost nothing useful about an individual animal, the resume gives landlords verified data: behavior profile, training history, health records, and rental track record. We pair that with an Anti-Damage Prevention Kit during onboarding and ongoing Bridge support if a housing crisis hits.

The pitch to landlords is simple. Pet-inclusive properties see 80% renewal rates and 70% occupancy compared to market averages. In a market with 6.9% vacancy rates nationally and 37% of properties offering concessions, that is a real competitive edge. And when you reduce ESA workarounds by just being inclusive from the start, you reduce the friction that drives landlords to ban pets in the first place.

The harder question for our field: how many of us have a housing intervention in our prevention toolkit? We talk about behavior support, spay/neuter access, food assistance. Those matter. But if a family loses their apartment over a pet deposit or a breed restriction, none of that other work matters because the animal still ends up in a shelter.

We are still early in testing this with landlords in our seven-county service area. I don't have outcome data to share yet. But the research is solid, and the gap in our field is real.

Who else is working on the housing side of this? I would love to know what is working, what is not, and where you are getting pushback from property managers.

Housing is an animal welfare issue. We all kind of know this. But I don't think most of us have looked at the numbers closely enough to understand the scale.

PIHI (Pet-Inclusive Housing Initiative) published data showing that 74.7% of pet-owning renters cause zero property damage. Of the remaining 25%, 88% of that damage is under $250. We are talking about a problem that largely does not exist in the way landlords think it does.

Meanwhile, when renters with pets can't find housing, 22.7% rehome their animal and 14% hide their pet entirely (which creates its own set of welfare risks). Another 23.4% declare an ESA, which is often just a workaround for restrictive policies, not a reflection of actual disability accommodation needs. That ESA loophole frustrates landlords and makes things worse for people who genuinely need service or support animals.

Here is what we are doing about it at Animal-Angels Foundation. We built a Pet Resume system through our AWRN (Animal Welfare Resource Network). Instead of breed labels, which tell you almost nothing useful about an individual animal, the resume gives landlords verified data: behavior profile, training history, health records, and rental track record. We pair that with an Anti-Damage Prevention Kit during onboarding and ongoing Bridge support if a housing crisis hits.

The pitch to landlords is simple. Pet-inclusive properties see 80% renewal rates and 70% occupancy compared to market averages. In a market with 6.9% vacancy rates nationally and 37% of properties offering concessions, that is a real competitive edge. And when you reduce ESA workarounds by just being inclusive from the start, you reduce the friction that drives landlords to ban pets in the first place.

The harder question for our field: how many of us have a housing intervention in our prevention toolkit? We talk about behavior support, spay/neuter access, food assistance. Those matter. But if a family loses their apartment over a pet deposit or a breed restriction, none of that other work matters because the animal still ends up in a shelter.

We are still early in testing this with landlords in our seven-county service area. I don't have outcome data to share yet. But the research is solid, and the gap in our field is real.

Who else is working on the housing side of this? I would love to know what is working, what is not, and where you are getting pushback from property managers.

This is a great conversation about the need for more pet-inclusive housing! At Pet-Inclusive Housing, we provide data, research,  reports, resources, and actionable tools that illuminate the path to more pet-inclusive rental housing.

You can access all of our reports, including our Pets & Housing Data 2025 Edition and 2021 Pet-Inclusive Housing Report, at petsandhousing.org/pet-inclusive-housing-reports/.

All of our free resources for animal welfare organizations, pet owners, and housing providers are available at petsandhousing.org. 

Please feel free to utilize and share our free reports and resources - we only ask that you cite us 😉

Housing is an animal welfare issue. We all kind of know this. But I don't think most of us have looked at the numbers closely enough to understand the scale.

PIHI (Pet-Inclusive Housing Initiative) published data showing that 74.7% of pet-owning renters cause zero property damage. Of the remaining 25%, 88% of that damage is under $250. We are talking about a problem that largely does not exist in the way landlords think it does.

Meanwhile, when renters with pets can't find housing, 22.7% rehome their animal and 14% hide their pet entirely (which creates its own set of welfare risks). Another 23.4% declare an ESA, which is often just a workaround for restrictive policies, not a reflection of actual disability accommodation needs. That ESA loophole frustrates landlords and makes things worse for people who genuinely need service or support animals.

Here is what we are doing about it at Animal-Angels Foundation. We built a Pet Resume system through our AWRN (Animal Welfare Resource Network). Instead of breed labels, which tell you almost nothing useful about an individual animal, the resume gives landlords verified data: behavior profile, training history, health records, and rental track record. We pair that with an Anti-Damage Prevention Kit during onboarding and ongoing Bridge support if a housing crisis hits.

The pitch to landlords is simple. Pet-inclusive properties see 80% renewal rates and 70% occupancy compared to market averages. In a market with 6.9% vacancy rates nationally and 37% of properties offering concessions, that is a real competitive edge. And when you reduce ESA workarounds by just being inclusive from the start, you reduce the friction that drives landlords to ban pets in the first place.

The harder question for our field: how many of us have a housing intervention in our prevention toolkit? We talk about behavior support, spay/neuter access, food assistance. Those matter. But if a family loses their apartment over a pet deposit or a breed restriction, none of that other work matters because the animal still ends up in a shelter.

We are still early in testing this with landlords in our seven-county service area. I don't have outcome data to share yet. But the research is solid, and the gap in our field is real.

Who else is working on the housing side of this? I would love to know what is working, what is not, and where you are getting pushback from property managers.

Housing is an animal welfare issue. We all kind of know this. But I don't think most of us have looked at the numbers closely enough to understand the scale.

PIHI (Pet-Inclusive Housing Initiative) published data showing that 74.7% of pet-owning renters cause zero property damage. Of the remaining 25%, 88% of that damage is under $250. We are talking about a problem that largely does not exist in the way landlords think it does.

Meanwhile, when renters with pets can't find housing, 22.7% rehome their animal and 14% hide their pet entirely (which creates its own set of welfare risks). Another 23.4% declare an ESA, which is often just a workaround for restrictive policies, not a reflection of actual disability accommodation needs. That ESA loophole frustrates landlords and makes things worse for people who genuinely need service or support animals.

Here is what we are doing about it at Animal-Angels Foundation. We built a Pet Resume system through our AWRN (Animal Welfare Resource Network). Instead of breed labels, which tell you almost nothing useful about an individual animal, the resume gives landlords verified data: behavior profile, training history, health records, and rental track record. We pair that with an Anti-Damage Prevention Kit during onboarding and ongoing Bridge support if a housing crisis hits.

The pitch to landlords is simple. Pet-inclusive properties see 80% renewal rates and 70% occupancy compared to market averages. In a market with 6.9% vacancy rates nationally and 37% of properties offering concessions, that is a real competitive edge. And when you reduce ESA workarounds by just being inclusive from the start, you reduce the friction that drives landlords to ban pets in the first place.

The harder question for our field: how many of us have a housing intervention in our prevention toolkit? We talk about behavior support, spay/neuter access, food assistance. Those matter. But if a family loses their apartment over a pet deposit or a breed restriction, none of that other work matters because the animal still ends up in a shelter.

We are still early in testing this with landlords in our seven-county service area. I don't have outcome data to share yet. But the research is solid, and the gap in our field is real.

Who else is working on the housing side of this? I would love to know what is working, what is not, and where you are getting pushback from property managers.

#PetSupportServices*

------------------------------
BJ Adkins
Founder/Director
Animal-Angels Foundation
Pinson, AL
bjadkins@animal-angels.org
animal-angelsfoundation.org
------------------------------

Thank you for your post, Ms. Adkins. This is a very important and pertinent topic.

As you identified, the Pet-Inclusive Housing Initiative (PIHI) is a major player in this area, and they have many partners across the country. You may have seen they have developed information specifically for housing managers: Housing Provider Resources | Pet-Inclusive Housing Initiative. 

PIHI and the non-profit Home to Home recently published a report with new data, insights, and approaches to housing barriers driving pet relinquishment: Housing Instability & Pet Rehoming A Collaborative Analysis | PDF to Flipbook.

You could reach out to PIHI directly; we (the Center for Pet Family Well-Being at the University of Tennessee) did this as we were preparing a grant application related to pets and housing, and they were very helpful. (edit: I see that Sara already responded)

Here are some other organizations that I have seen post recently about their work on pet-inclusive housing:
- Pet-Friendly Housing for Big Dogs | Best Friends Animal Society
- Removing Barriers to Pets in Housing | ASPCA- 
- https://www.seattlehumane.org/2024/10/10/a-case-for-more-pet-inclusive-housing-2/ 
- Action for Pet-Inclusive Housing: Keeping Families Together • MSPCA-Angell
- https://www.heartla.org/ 
- https://www.mydogismyhome.org/ (while they mostly focus on access to shelter for unhoused individuals and their pets, their latest conference last month also covered housing insecurity more broadly, especially for people with pets)
- https://www.linkedin.com/posts/human-animal-bond-research-initiative-habri-_we-are-thrilled-to-announce-the-launch-of-activity-7397011283541393408--lz6?
- habri.org 

I hope this is helpful. I am sure there are others on this forum with more information.

------------------------------
Claire Schuch, PhD
Associate Director for Research
Program for Pet Health Equity
University of Tennessee, Knoxville

Original Message:
Sent: 04-03-2026 06:31 AM
From: Bj Adkins
Subject: The housing question we keep talking about

Housing is an animal welfare issue. We all kind of know this. But I don't think most of us have looked at the numbers closely enough to understand the scale.

PIHI (Pet-Inclusive Housing Initiative) published data showing that 74.7% of pet-owning renters cause zero property damage. Of the remaining 25%, 88% of that damage is under $250. We are talking about a problem that largely does not exist in the way landlords think it does.

Meanwhile, when renters with pets can't find housing, 22.7% rehome their animal and 14% hide their pet entirely (which creates its own set of welfare risks). Another 23.4% declare an ESA, which is often just a workaround for restrictive policies, not a reflection of actual disability accommodation needs. That ESA loophole frustrates landlords and makes things worse for people who genuinely need service or support animals.

Here is what we are doing about it at Animal-Angels Foundation. We built a Pet Resume system through our AWRN (Animal Welfare Resource Network). Instead of breed labels, which tell you almost nothing useful about an individual animal, the resume gives landlords verified data: behavior profile, training history, health records, and rental track record. We pair that with an Anti-Damage Prevention Kit during onboarding and ongoing Bridge support if a housing crisis hits.

The pitch to landlords is simple. Pet-inclusive properties see 80% renewal rates and 70% occupancy compared to market averages. In a market with 6.9% vacancy rates nationally and 37% of properties offering concessions, that is a real competitive edge. And when you reduce ESA workarounds by just being inclusive from the start, you reduce the friction that drives landlords to ban pets in the first place.

The harder question for our field: how many of us have a housing intervention in our prevention toolkit? We talk about behavior support, spay/neuter access, food assistance. Those matter. But if a family loses their apartment over a pet deposit or a breed restriction, none of that other work matters because the animal still ends up in a shelter.

We are still early in testing this with landlords in our seven-county service area. I don't have outcome data to share yet. But the research is solid, and the gap in our field is real.

Who else is working on the housing side of this? I would love to know what is working, what is not, and where you are getting pushback from property managers.

#PetSupportServices*

------------------------------
BJ Adkins
Founder/Director
Animal-Angels Foundation
Pinson, AL
bjadkins@animal-angels.org
animal-angelsfoundation.org
------------------------------

Thank you for your post, Ms. Adkins. This is a very important and pertinent topic.

As you identified, the Pet-Inclusive Housing Initiative (PIHI) is a major player in this area, and they have many partners across the country. You may have seen they have developed information specifically for housing managers: Housing Provider Resources | Pet-Inclusive Housing Initiative. 

PIHI and the non-profit Home to Home recently published a report with new data, insights, and approaches to housing barriers driving pet relinquishment: Housing Instability & Pet Rehoming A Collaborative Analysis | PDF to Flipbook.

You could reach out to PIHI directly; we (the Center for Pet Family Well-Being at the University of Tennessee) did this as we were preparing a grant application related to pets and housing, and they were very helpful. (edit: I see that Sara already responded)

Here are some other organizations that I have seen post recently about their work on pet-inclusive housing:
- Pet-Friendly Housing for Big Dogs | Best Friends Animal Society
- Removing Barriers to Pets in Housing | ASPCA- 
- https://www.seattlehumane.org/2024/10/10/a-case-for-more-pet-inclusive-housing-2/ 
- Action for Pet-Inclusive Housing: Keeping Families Together • MSPCA-Angell
- https://www.heartla.org/ 
- https://www.mydogismyhome.org/ (while they mostly focus on access to shelter for unhoused individuals and their pets, their latest conference last month also covered housing insecurity more broadly, especially for people with pets)
- https://www.linkedin.com/posts/human-animal-bond-research-initiative-habri-_we-are-thrilled-to-announce-the-launch-of-activity-7397011283541393408--lz6?
- habri.org 

I hope this is helpful. I am sure there are others on this forum with more information.

------------------------------
Claire Schuch, PhD
Associate Director for Research
Program for Pet Health Equity
University of Tennessee, Knoxville

Original Message:
Sent: 04-03-2026 06:31 AM
From: Bj Adkins
Subject: The housing question we keep talking about

Housing is an animal welfare issue. We all kind of know this. But I don't think most of us have looked at the numbers closely enough to understand the scale.

PIHI (Pet-Inclusive Housing Initiative) published data showing that 74.7% of pet-owning renters cause zero property damage. Of the remaining 25%, 88% of that damage is under $250. We are talking about a problem that largely does not exist in the way landlords think it does.

Meanwhile, when renters with pets can't find housing, 22.7% rehome their animal and 14% hide their pet entirely (which creates its own set of welfare risks). Another 23.4% declare an ESA, which is often just a workaround for restrictive policies, not a reflection of actual disability accommodation needs. That ESA loophole frustrates landlords and makes things worse for people who genuinely need service or support animals.

Here is what we are doing about it at Animal-Angels Foundation. We built a Pet Resume system through our AWRN (Animal Welfare Resource Network). Instead of breed labels, which tell you almost nothing useful about an individual animal, the resume gives landlords verified data: behavior profile, training history, health records, and rental track record. We pair that with an Anti-Damage Prevention Kit during onboarding and ongoing Bridge support if a housing crisis hits.

The pitch to landlords is simple. Pet-inclusive properties see 80% renewal rates and 70% occupancy compared to market averages. In a market with 6.9% vacancy rates nationally and 37% of properties offering concessions, that is a real competitive edge. And when you reduce ESA workarounds by just being inclusive from the start, you reduce the friction that drives landlords to ban pets in the first place.

The harder question for our field: how many of us have a housing intervention in our prevention toolkit? We talk about behavior support, spay/neuter access, food assistance. Those matter. But if a family loses their apartment over a pet deposit or a breed restriction, none of that other work matters because the animal still ends up in a shelter.

We are still early in testing this with landlords in our seven-county service area. I don't have outcome data to share yet. But the research is solid, and the gap in our field is real.

Who else is working on the housing side of this? I would love to know what is working, what is not, and where you are getting pushback from property managers.

#PetSupportServices*

------------------------------
BJ Adkins
Founder/Director
Animal-Angels Foundation
Pinson, AL
bjadkins@animal-angels.org
animal-angelsfoundation.org
------------------------------

Thank you for your post, Ms. Adkins. This is a very important and pertinent topic.

As you identified, the Pet-Inclusive Housing Initiative (PIHI) is a major player in this area, and they have many partners across the country. You may have seen they have developed information specifically for housing managers: Housing Provider Resources | Pet-Inclusive Housing Initiative. 

PIHI and the non-profit Home to Home recently published a report with new data, insights, and approaches to housing barriers driving pet relinquishment: Housing Instability & Pet Rehoming A Collaborative Analysis | PDF to Flipbook.

You could reach out to PIHI directly; we (the Center for Pet Family Well-Being at the University of Tennessee) did this as we were preparing a grant application related to pets and housing, and they were very helpful. (edit: I see that Sara already responded)

Here are some other organizations that I have seen post recently about their work on pet-inclusive housing:
- Pet-Friendly Housing for Big Dogs | Best Friends Animal Society
- Removing Barriers to Pets in Housing | ASPCA- 
- https://www.seattlehumane.org/2024/10/10/a-case-for-more-pet-inclusive-housing-2/ 
- Action for Pet-Inclusive Housing: Keeping Families Together • MSPCA-Angell
- https://www.heartla.org/ 
- https://www.mydogismyhome.org/ (while they mostly focus on access to shelter for unhoused individuals and their pets, their latest conference last month also covered housing insecurity more broadly, especially for people with pets)
- https://www.linkedin.com/posts/human-animal-bond-research-initiative-habri-_we-are-thrilled-to-announce-the-launch-of-activity-7397011283541393408--lz6?
- habri.org 

I hope this is helpful. I am sure there are others on this forum with more information.

------------------------------
Claire Schuch, PhD
Associate Director for Research
Program for Pet Health Equity
University of Tennessee, Knoxville

Original Message:
Sent: 04-03-2026 06:31 AM
From: Bj Adkins
Subject: The housing question we keep talking about

Housing is an animal welfare issue. We all kind of know this. But I don't think most of us have looked at the numbers closely enough to understand the scale.

PIHI (Pet-Inclusive Housing Initiative) published data showing that 74.7% of pet-owning renters cause zero property damage. Of the remaining 25%, 88% of that damage is under $250. We are talking about a problem that largely does not exist in the way landlords think it does.

Meanwhile, when renters with pets can't find housing, 22.7% rehome their animal and 14% hide their pet entirely (which creates its own set of welfare risks). Another 23.4% declare an ESA, which is often just a workaround for restrictive policies, not a reflection of actual disability accommodation needs. That ESA loophole frustrates landlords and makes things worse for people who genuinely need service or support animals.

Here is what we are doing about it at Animal-Angels Foundation. We built a Pet Resume system through our AWRN (Animal Welfare Resource Network). Instead of breed labels, which tell you almost nothing useful about an individual animal, the resume gives landlords verified data: behavior profile, training history, health records, and rental track record. We pair that with an Anti-Damage Prevention Kit during onboarding and ongoing Bridge support if a housing crisis hits.

The pitch to landlords is simple. Pet-inclusive properties see 80% renewal rates and 70% occupancy compared to market averages. In a market with 6.9% vacancy rates nationally and 37% of properties offering concessions, that is a real competitive edge. And when you reduce ESA workarounds by just being inclusive from the start, you reduce the friction that drives landlords to ban pets in the first place.

The harder question for our field: how many of us have a housing intervention in our prevention toolkit? We talk about behavior support, spay/neuter access, food assistance. Those matter. But if a family loses their apartment over a pet deposit or a breed restriction, none of that other work matters because the animal still ends up in a shelter.

We are still early in testing this with landlords in our seven-county service area. I don't have outcome data to share yet. But the research is solid, and the gap in our field is real.

Who else is working on the housing side of this? I would love to know what is working, what is not, and where you are getting pushback from property managers.

#PetSupportServices*

------------------------------
BJ Adkins
Founder/Director
Animal-Angels Foundation
Pinson, AL
bjadkins@animal-angels.org
animal-angelsfoundation.org
------------------------------

Housing is an animal welfare issue. We all kind of know this. But I don't think most of us have looked at the numbers closely enough to understand the scale.

PIHI (Pet-Inclusive Housing Initiative) published data showing that 74.7% of pet-owning renters cause zero property damage. Of the remaining 25%, 88% of that damage is under $250. We are talking about a problem that largely does not exist in the way landlords think it does.

Meanwhile, when renters with pets can't find housing, 22.7% rehome their animal and 14% hide their pet entirely (which creates its own set of welfare risks). Another 23.4% declare an ESA, which is often just a workaround for restrictive policies, not a reflection of actual disability accommodation needs. That ESA loophole frustrates landlords and makes things worse for people who genuinely need service or support animals.

Here is what we are doing about it at Animal-Angels Foundation. We built a Pet Resume system through our AWRN (Animal Welfare Resource Network). Instead of breed labels, which tell you almost nothing useful about an individual animal, the resume gives landlords verified data: behavior profile, training history, health records, and rental track record. We pair that with an Anti-Damage Prevention Kit during onboarding and ongoing Bridge support if a housing crisis hits.

The pitch to landlords is simple. Pet-inclusive properties see 80% renewal rates and 70% occupancy compared to market averages. In a market with 6.9% vacancy rates nationally and 37% of properties offering concessions, that is a real competitive edge. And when you reduce ESA workarounds by just being inclusive from the start, you reduce the friction that drives landlords to ban pets in the first place.

The harder question for our field: how many of us have a housing intervention in our prevention toolkit? We talk about behavior support, spay/neuter access, food assistance. Those matter. But if a family loses their apartment over a pet deposit or a breed restriction, none of that other work matters because the animal still ends up in a shelter.

We are still early in testing this with landlords in our seven-county service area. I don't have outcome data to share yet. But the research is solid, and the gap in our field is real.

Who else is working on the housing side of this? I would love to know what is working, what is not, and where you are getting pushback from property managers.

Really interesting to hear about the pet resume system you're testing! Have you found that landlords are more open once they see verified behavior/health info instead of just breed labels? Curious to follow your results.

Housing is an animal welfare issue. We all kind of know this. But I don't think most of us have looked at the numbers closely enough to understand the scale.

PIHI (Pet-Inclusive Housing Initiative) published data showing that 74.7% of pet-owning renters cause zero property damage. Of the remaining 25%, 88% of that damage is under $250. We are talking about a problem that largely does not exist in the way landlords think it does.

Meanwhile, when renters with pets can't find housing, 22.7% rehome their animal and 14% hide their pet entirely (which creates its own set of welfare risks). Another 23.4% declare an ESA, which is often just a workaround for restrictive policies, not a reflection of actual disability accommodation needs. That ESA loophole frustrates landlords and makes things worse for people who genuinely need service or support animals.

Here is what we are doing about it at Animal-Angels Foundation. We built a Pet Resume system through our AWRN (Animal Welfare Resource Network). Instead of breed labels, which tell you almost nothing useful about an individual animal, the resume gives landlords verified data: behavior profile, training history, health records, and rental track record. We pair that with an Anti-Damage Prevention Kit during onboarding and ongoing Bridge support if a housing crisis hits.

The pitch to landlords is simple. Pet-inclusive properties see 80% renewal rates and 70% occupancy compared to market averages. In a market with 6.9% vacancy rates nationally and 37% of properties offering concessions, that is a real competitive edge. And when you reduce ESA workarounds by just being inclusive from the start, you reduce the friction that drives landlords to ban pets in the first place.

The harder question for our field: how many of us have a housing intervention in our prevention toolkit? We talk about behavior support, spay/neuter access, food assistance. Those matter. But if a family loses their apartment over a pet deposit or a breed restriction, none of that other work matters because the animal still ends up in a shelter.

We are still early in testing this with landlords in our seven-county service area. I don't have outcome data to share yet. But the research is solid, and the gap in our field is real.

Who else is working on the housing side of this? I would love to know what is working, what is not, and where you are getting pushback from property managers.