Horse selection differs between secular and non-secular equine-assisted organizations

Abstract

Abstract Equine assisted services (EAS) consist of a complex system of horse, human, and environmental factors which ultimately impact program effectiveness. Despite recognition in the literature that organizational affiliation with spirituality or religion impacts values, practices, and culture, connection between faith, spirituality, and specific religious belief, when combined with EAS is a nascent field of inquiry. Despite preliminary observations that suggest many organizations offering EAS are affiliated with religious institutions or claim their practices are informed by a particular faith, the extent of these non-secular affiliations is unknown in current literature. To explore this, we surveyed 113 EAS organizations to determine the extent and type of non-secular (i.e., faith-based) affiliations and whether these affiliations were professed publicly, to all internal staff and participants, to staff only, or not at all (i.e., level of “transparency”). We collected data on a range of horse characteristics and program practices. We used chi-square analyses to assess associations between secular/non-secular status and characteristics of practices. Of 93 organizations, 71% claimed a non-secular affiliation. Of non-secular organizations, 61% were fully transparent, and 36% were open about their belief system only internally with staff and participants. More non-secular organizations emphasized horses that were sensitive to humans and the environment (p = 0.0063). Non-secular organizations placed more importance on partnering with horses with a history of abuse or neglect (p = 0.0461). Transparency of faith or religious affiliation was associated with selection of horses based on girth, bone, and sturdiness (p = 0.0004). This is the first study to explore how a proxy for organizational-level values is associated with EAS practice differences. Further research is needed to determine if program-level differences in faith affiliation impact outcomes for participants in EAS.