Who Gets to Keep Their Pet? Structural Inequity In Rental Housing Policy and the Human-Animal Bond In Colorado

Background/Introduction:
Access to safe and stable housing shapes health, opportunity, and well-being, yet structural barriers embedded in rental housing policies disproportionately burden low-income households with companion animals. The human-animal bond is a critical but underrecognized dimension of health equity, as pets support emotional well-being, daily routine, social connection, and stability across the lifespan. Restrictive rental policies related to breed, size, species, animal number limits, pet deposits, and recurring monthly fees can increase risks of housing instability, pet relinquishment, financial hardship, and disconnection from social support networks. These barriers are especially consequential for households already navigating poverty, domestic violence, disability, health crises, or homelessness. This study examines barriers to pet-inclusive housing in Colorado and highlights community-driven solutions for expanding access, while examining how rental policies shape housing security, family stability, and the well-being of people and their animals.

Methods:
Using a Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR) approach, we partnered with five community-based organizations, including a domestic violence center, two animal shelters, an academic center, and an organization dedicated to keeping unhoused people with their pets. Partners contributed to study design, recruitment, interpretation, and dissemination planning to ensure the research reflected the priorities of communities most affected by pet-related housing barriers. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 25 participants who had experienced pet-related housing challenges in Colorado. Interview facilitators also brought lived experience navigating pet-related housing barriers, strengthening rapport, trust, and contextual interpretation. Rapid qualitative analysis was used to support timely, actionable, and community-led dissemination of findings to policy, practice, and service audiences.

Results:
Findings identified structural and systems-level priorities necessary to advance housing security and health equity for families with pets in Colorado. Participants emphasized the need for reliable, accessible referral lists that providers can use in real time; affordable pet support services (e.g., veterinary care, grooming, pet food); temporary foster or boarding options during hospitalization, treatment, domestic violence shelter entry, or crisis; and expanded pet-inclusive options across the housing continuum, including emergency shelters, transitional housing, subsidized housing, and market-rate rentals. Additional priorities included training for housing providers on bias and fair housing law, training for law enforcement and first responders on interacting with pets and service animals during crises, financial assistance for pet deposits and pet rent, and accessible integrated service models that address both human and animal needs.

Conclusion and Implications:
Housing is a social justice issue with direct consequences for the health and well-being of people and their pets. Our findings suggest that the absence of pet-inclusive housing policies reinforces broader structural inequities affecting low-income families and can function as a pathway to both housing instability and avoidable pet relinquishment. Policies and coordinated community support systems that help people and pets remain together may support mental health, housing stability, service engagement, and community resilience. By centering lived experience and community wisdom, this study advances advocacy, practice, and policy solutions in Colorado while offering a scalable framework for equitable pet-inclusive housing reform in other communities.