1 / 24

Standards Reorganization

Standards Reorganization. Standards Reorganization Task Force. Task Force Members: Ainslie Kraeck, Co-Chair Leanne Woodward, Co-chair Sharon Butler, DVM Catherine McKinnon Elizabeth Long Roberta Hirshon Kristen Sanders. Staff Advisors: Carrie Garnett Jeff Kelling Jama Rice.

diandra
Download Presentation

Standards Reorganization

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Standards Reorganization

  2. Standards Reorganization Task Force Task Force Members: Ainslie Kraeck, Co-Chair Leanne Woodward, Co-chair Sharon Butler, DVM Catherine McKinnon Elizabeth Long Roberta Hirshon Kristen Sanders Staff Advisors: Carrie Garnett Jeff Kelling Jama Rice

  3. Standards Reorganization • What • Moving current standards into new sections • Clarifying intent and interpretations • Combining like standards • No intent change • Why • Professionalism • PAC facilitation • Inclusion of providers • How • New model – not just rearrangement

  4. Current Standards Organization • Core • Admin - 20 • Program -32 • Facilities - 27 • Specialty • Hippotherapy - 13 • Interactive vaulting – 11 • Driving - 22 • EFP - 8 • Non-profit, therapeutic riding center driven • Isolated development

  5. Current Standard Challenges • Core • Admin – non-profit, U.S. centric • Plans, policies and procedures scattered throughout Programs and Facility standards • Program - therapeutic riding centric • Exclusionary to growing EFP/L community • Facility and equine welfare are intertwined • Fosters perception of equines as tools

  6. Current Standard Issues • Specialty • Repetitive • Same requirements (credentialing, training, conditioning) in specialties • Limited to present concepts • Requires constant update to include new specialized activities • Constantly expanding • EFL coming; new medical models • Downplays professionalism of therapeutic riding, not “specialized” • No session/lesson safety standards for • therapeutic riding (driving standards set the • example)

  7. What we tried – and abandoned • Task force attempted original reorganization into • Core • Business/admin • Facilities • Equine Welfare/management • Activities • Therapeutic Riding • Driving • Interactive Vaulting (IV) • Hippotherapy • Equine-facilitated Psychotherapy • We couldn’t do it.

  8. What we tried – and abandoned • Problems: • Redundancy in activities • For example mounted hippotherapy and therapeutic riding have similar equipment and safety requirements • All activities have ground components • Policies for activities were in different places • Written helmet standards for interactive vaulting but not for others • No specific therapeutic riding standards – all defined mounted

  9. Why a new model? • We abandoned our attempt and began to explore new models. • When the major categories of SERVICES and ACTIVITIES were identified the individual standards began to fall in to place.

  10. Service Delivery Model • Why do we use equine-assisted activities? • To provide a service • Practicing as a medical professional • Currently, PT, OT and SLP but open to rehab, pediatrics as well as new services. • This model easily accommodates new growth areas in the industry. • Practicing as a mental health professional • Practicing as an educational professional • IEP and/or self growth open to other – spiritual, social, etc. • Providing a therapeutic horsemanship activity • Recreation, sport, competition, etc.

  11. Activities Offered • What activities can we use to deliver EAAT? • Mounted • Driving • Interactive vaulting • Groundwork

  12. NEW Model

  13. Service Delivery Model • Our common approach in delivering services to clients • We are businesses • We are credentialed professionals • We require additional training/proficiencies • We select appropriate equine activities from the spectrum • We use a team approach • We respect the equine • We value safety and ethics

  14. Service Delivery Model • Separate delivery of service from activity. • There are only 4 things we do as an activity • We are on the horse • We are off the horse • We are on and off the horse • We are attached to the horse from behind • All other differentiation is in the goal of the activity

  15. Service Delivery Model • Medical Objective Model • practiced by a licensed and credentialed medical professional • to facilitate a medical treatment goal • Mental Health Objective Model • practiced by a licensed and credentialed mental health professional • to facilitate a mental health treatment goal

  16. Service Delivery Model • Educational Objective Model • practiced by a licensed and credentialed educational professional • to facilitate educational goals • Equestrian Skills ObjectiveModel • provided by a professional credentialed instructor • to facilitate achievement of equestrian skills goals

  17. Activity Types • Mounted • Includes tandem-mounted • Vaulting • Driving • Groundwork • Includes groundwork for all other activities such as grooming, lungeing, long-lining

  18. What the Model looks like

  19. New System of Standards Organization • Five sections • Administration and Business Section (old admin) • Facilities Section (old facilities) • Equine Welfare and Management Section (old facilities/program) • Activities Section (old specialty) • Services Section (old specialty)

  20. New System of Standards (continued) • Administration and Business Standards • Plans, policies and procedures • Human resources • Training • Facility Standards • Grounds/Buildings • Equipment storage and maintenance • Activity area • Equine Welfare and Management Standards • Safety • Care • Equipment fit and assignment • Selection/training/lifecycle

  21. New System of Standards (continued) • Activity Standards • Safety of participant • Activity equipment (safety/selection) • Equine training • Service Standards • Credentialing and certifications • Professional responsibility • Paperwork requirements specific to service

  22. Assumptions • Baseline certification criteria will include competencies in all ground activities that support other (mounted, driving, interactive vaulting) activities • All standards will be reviewed • Task force has defined policies, procedure and practice • Technology update • International applicability • Reference to PATH Intl. certifications will be stated as “appropriately PATH Intl. Credentialed Professional” • Duplicate standards will ultimately be combined resulting in effective organization and reduced redundancy

  23. Benefits • Responds to membership requests for manual organization to facilitate the premier accredited center process success • Positions the association to retain the leadership role in providing EAAT industry best practices • Ultimately increases the professionalism of our Industry

  24. Timeline • August – October 2011 • Review on-site work • Write new standards for repetitive standards • October 2011 • Programs & Standards Oversight Committee comfortable with direction and reorganization • November 2011 • Membership conceptual update • March 2012 • Manual ready for staff to print

More Related