Every org has requirements. Income documentation, residency proof, pre-existing spay/neuter status, surrender fees, foster ownership minimums, age limits, breed restrictions. They make sense on paper. They protect resources. They filter for serious applicants. They keep the workload manageable.
But sometimes a requirement is the exact thing that filters out the people the program was built to help. The family that needs the most help is often the family that cannot produce the documentation, cannot make the appointment, cannot pay the fee.
I'm curious which requirement you removed from your services and what happened next. The income test on your low-cost spay/neuter. The surrender fee. The breed restriction on adoption. The volunteer history requirement before someone could foster. The address proof for food assistance.
A few questions:
What was the requirement?
Why was it there originally?
What changed when you took it off?
Did the volume of "people taking advantage" actually materialize, or was that mostly a fear?
What did you put in its place, if anything?
The honest answers help all of us figure out which requirements are real safeguards and which ones are the wall between our work and the people we built the work for.
#AdmissionsandIntake(includingIntake-to-placement)#OrganizationalManagement------------------------------
BJ Adkins
Founder/Director
Animal-Angels Foundation
Pinson, AL
bjadkins@animal-angels.organimal-angelsfoundation.org
------------------------------