© Tammie Rogers 2021
Page Title
ADI Accreditation
The
following….
applies
exclusively
to
United
States
military
bases.
If
you
do
not
visit
military
bases,
the
Department
of
Defence “accreditation” policy does not impact you.
The
Americans
with
Disabilities
Act
(ADA)
covers
access
for
all
individuals
(military
or
civilian).
if
you
are
not
on
a
military
base.
The
ADA
does
not
require
that
a
Service
Dog
is
trained
by
any
specific
organization,
and
you
may
even
train
your
own
dog
as
long as it functions at the standards set by the ADA.
January 7, 2016
The
Department
of
Defense
enacted
a
law
(1300.27)
that
specifies
Service
Dogs
which
are
permitted
on
military
establishments
must
come
from
an
accredited
service
dog
organization.
The
DoD
definition:
"accredited
service
dog
organization
-
A
non-governmental
organization
that
raises,
trains,
certifies,
and
provides
service
dogs
to
qualified
Service
members,
and
that
is
accredited
by
Assistance
Dogs
International,
the
International
Guide
Dog
Federation,
or
any
other
service
dog accrediting organization recognized by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs."
Oops…. we have a problem
Committed
Canine
cannot
seek
ADI
accreditation.
ADI
will
not
accredit
a
company
that
does
not
hold
a
501
(c)-3
not-for-profit
status.
We
do
not
understand
how
that
status
makes
a
company
better
at
training
dogs
or
more
reliable,
responsible
or
ethical
at
caring
for
them.
We
don’t
know
how
that
status
makes
us
better
instructors
for
disabled
individuals
who
wish
to
partner
with
a
Service
Dog.
But,
that
is
their
policy
and
the
DoD
(VA)
doesn’t
have
another
organization
on
their
“recognized”
list.
In
2011,
when
the
VA
was
proposing
the
new
law,
I
wrote
to
ADI
no
less
than
three
times
to
ask
the
rationale
for
their
requirement,
and
whether
they
would
change
that
if
the
VA
law
was
enacted.
They
never
returned
my
correspondences.
I
would think that ADI would want to accredit any company that meets its standards. But, that is not the case.
Not
for
profit
doesn’t
mean
“free”
Service
Dogs,
and
it
doesn’t
even
mean
that
the
dogs
that
are
produced
by
NFP
companies
will
be
less
expensive
to
acquire
than
those
produced
by
a
private
trainer
or
for-profit
business.
It
certainly
doesn’t
mean
it
will
be
faster
to
get
the
dog,
either.
There
are
costs
associated
with
maintaining
a
not-for-profit
organization.
As
a
basic,
small
business
we
prefer
to
focus
on
those
activities
at
which
we
excel,
which
is
training
dogs
and
instructing
people.
We
feel
that
the
way
a
business
structures
its
finances
shouldn’t
have
an
influence
on
whether
it
meets
the
standards
for
producing
high functioning Service Dogs and supporting their disabled military veteran handlers.
Historically,
Committed
Canine
did
submit
an
application
for
501-c3
status
well
before
the
DoD
established
their
law.
We
did
so
not
because
we
ached
to
run
a
not-for-profit
organization
but
because
we
were
at
a
disadvantage
marketing
our
existence
on
websites
(such
as
Wounded
Warrior)
that
would
not
post
a
Service
Dog
company
URL
unless
it
was
a
not-for-profit.
It
did
not
matter
than
our
turn-around
time
and
prices
were
better
than
most
of
the
not-for-profit
companies
we
examined
at
the
time,
and
our
dog
training
experience
was
exceptional
and
deep
rooted.
We
paid
the
IRS
the
$850
application
fee.
We
were
told
that,
since
Robert
and
Tammie
are
a
married
couple,
they
pose
a
conflict
of
interest
risk.
We
were
told
that
we
would
need
to
identify
additional
board
members,
and
that
Tammie
&
Robert
would
not
be
able
to
vote
on
certain
financial
matters.
We
chose
to
let
the
application
expire
and
the
IRS
kept
our
money.
It
simply
did
not
make
sense
for
our
business
to
be
“bigger”
administratively
to
appear
more
honest.
More
people
on
a
board
doesn’t
buy
more
integrity,
and
it
certainly
can
diminish
efficiency.
That
reduction
in
efficiency
can
end
up
causing
longer
delays
and
increased
costs
for
our
clients
who
need
Service
Dogs.
We
had
trained
and
placed
a
number
of
dogs
with
disabled
US
military
veterans
as
well
as
civilians
by
the
time
that
we
applied
for
the
501-c3,
so
we
knew
that
we
were
helping
people
gain
independence
and
we
felt
a
desire
to
reach
out
to more individuals. But, we had to draw the line when the detriments outweighed the benefits.
Monopoly
Even
if
we
were
permitted
to
do
so,
we
are
not
certain
that
we
would
seek
ADI
accreditation.
However,
the
DoD
does
not
offer
another
source
for
accreditation,
besides
ADI.
We
also
question
a
couple
of
other
policies
of
the
organization.
ADI
requires
the
applicant
to
provide
a
letter
of
reference
from
a
currently
accredited
ADI
member
company
as
part
of
their
application
packet.
This
concerns
us.
Is
ADI
providing
professional
inspection
of
a
company’s
capacity
to
produce
high
quality
Service
Dogs
or,
is
it
a
social
organization?
What
is
the
point
of
the
certification
process
if
the
accrediting
organization
feels
a
need
to
get
feedback
from
another
company
who
has
not
ever
audited
the
candidate
firm’s
processes?
This
requirement
makes
us
question
the
integrity
of
the
entire
ADI
system.
Also,
to
submit
an
application
for
ADI
membership,
the
applicant
need
only
have
trained
three
Service
Dogs
which
were
still
functioning
at
the
end
of
one
year.
Yet
they
seem
to
have
a
lot
of
focus
on
things
like
how
a
company’s
Board
of
Directors
is
structured.
It
makes
us
wonder
whether
ADI
is
significantly
focused
on
auditing a company’s capacity to produce high standard Service Dogs and to adequately serve potential Service Dog handlers?
Discrimination and breach of Fair Trade Laws
We
understand
that
the
Department
of
Defense
felt
a
need
to
provide
some
sort
of
validation
of
Service
Dog
companies
that
serve
disabled
veterans.
However,
we
are
not
certain
that
creating
a
monopoly
that
excludes
many
reputable
companies
from
assisting
veterans
was
the
best
option.
We
believe
this
is
a
case
of
discrimination.
The
Department
of
Defense
has
a
requirement
that
military
veterans
must
acquire
their
Service
Dogs
from
ADI
accredited
companies
but
many
companies
that
produce
high
quality
Service
Dogs
cannot
gain
accreditation
unless
they
completely
change
their
financial
structure
and
delve
into
the
realm
of
operating
a
not-for-profit
organization.
The
new
law
has
significantly
limited
our
ability
to
serve
US
military
disabled veterans.
Additionally,
the
law
is
quite
possibly
a
breach
of
Fair
Trade
regulations.
Because
of
the
law,
a
veteran
has
to
decide
whether
he
wants
to
work
with
us
and
be
excluded
at
military
bases
when
traveling
with
his
Service
Dog
or
seek
an
alternative
which
may
not
be
the
best
option
for
him.
Additionally,
while
the
ADA
(Americans
with
Disabilities
Act)
has
no
regulation
about
how
a
Service
Dog
is
trained
(only
how
it
performs)
the
new
military-exclusive
law
has
prompted
more
people
to
get
wind
of
a
“new
law”.
They
may
believe
it
is
a
federal
regulation,
not
just
a
military
one.
More
potential
clients
are
asking
us
about
certification
and
we
find
that
we
have
to
explain
the
whole
crazy
story.
Sadly,
for
most,
especially
those
who
don’t
understand
the
entire
situation,
it
seems
far
more
safe
to
simply
seek
a
Service
Dog
from
an
ADI
accredited
company
than
to
try
to
understand
the
sorted
details
of
the
military
specific
situation.
To
say
that
we
are
not
accredited
makes
it
seem
that
we
are not meeting minimum standards, which is not the case.
New law removes options for disabled veterans
The
most
basic
issue
that
veterans
now
face
is
that
there
may
not
be
sufficient
ADI
accredited
organizations
to
serve
them.
Here is what I was able to pull from the ADI website at the time of this writing:
•
91 total organizations are listed in the ADI database in the USA
•
15 specify Guide for blind as primary function (low / no priority for veterans who are not blind)
•
15 specify Hearing for deaf as primary function (ditto – “deaf”)
•
4 specify Diabetic Alert as the primary service (ditto – “diabetic”)
•
3 specify disabled children as exclusive, or primary service (low priority for veterans)
•
50
of
the
organizations
list
a
limited
service
radius
(meaning
that
the
recipient
must
live
within
a
prescribed
distance
of
the organization)
•
16 are in CA
o
3 of those are exclusive Guide for blind
o
2 specialize in Diabetic Alert
o
6 of those have limited service ranges
o
4 as small as a one county radius
•
7 are in FL
o
1 is exclusively Guide for the blind
o
3 list Hearing as primary
o
1 is exclusive to children
o
4 are limited to FL state or specific counties in the state
•
7 are in NY
o
3 are exclusively Guide for the blind
o
1 lists its service area exclusive to east coast
•
5 are in PA
o
4 are limited to PA state or counties
o
1 has a 150 mi radius
o
1 is limited to eastern states
•
4 are in OH
o
2 are limited to a three-state radius
o
one has a 90 mile radius
•
4 are in WA
o
3 are limited to WA state (or just part of the state)
You get the idea.
Many
states
have
just
one
or
no
ADI
accredited
organizations
serving
them.
If
you
are
a
veteran
in
need
of
a
Service
Dog
who
resides
in
the
middle
of
the
country,
you
will
be
hard
pressed
to
find
an
ADI
accredited
organization
that
will
serve
you.
That
is terribly unfortunate.
With
fewer
options
available,
the
wait
time
is
likely
to
increase.
Not
to
be
overly
dramatic,
but
when
your
brain
is
trying
to
convince you to kill yourself, waiting two years to partner with your Service Dog may as well be an eternity.
We believe that the new law is bad for business and worse for veterans.