North American Riding for the Handicapped Association, Inc.  NARHA 
Mailing Address: PO Box 33150 Denver, Colorado 80233
National Office Physical Address: 7475 Dakin Street Suite #600 Denver, CO 80221  map
NARHA@NARHA.ORG
800-369-RIDE (7433)       Fax (303) 252-4610 
NARHA is a 501(c)3 Organization

NARHA home

NARHA Survey Results
Prepared by Rebecca Cook OTR, HPCS
bookmarks on this page...
note on survey statistics      affiliation of participants harnesses
driving vehicles client disabilities driving lessons
equine partners misc. interesting statistics one horse/one carriage
survey summary appendix 1 survey appendix 2 carriages

More web pages about driving...
(pdf files require an adobe reader)

Level I driving criteria

Level II driving criteria


Driving Q & A

Workshop and certification overview

Workshop application

Certification application

Driving Certification Subcommittee
 Members


Driving faculty and evaluators

Precautions to therapeutic driving

2005 driving survey results

2005 driving survey results:  Appendix 2 "Carriage List"

Yahoo Listserv for Therapeutic Driving

Therapeutic Driving
Home Page


Sis Gould Driving Recognition Award

 

 

 

 

rev 02/14/2008

 


Background Information 
The Driving Survey, composed in 2005 by the North American Riding for the Handicapped Association (NARHA) Driving Committee, was implemented to discover norms of practice utilized in American and International therapeutic driving communities. Survey statistics will assist in guiding research in therapeutic driving and may provide helpful information for those
wishing to start a driving program.  The survey was not intended to reveal guidelines for safety or “best practice”, as already established, for example, by NARHA in the Driving Specialty Standards. The survey answers do reflect the current choice of equipment, equines, and protocol employed by recognized programs giving therapeutic driving lessons.

The survey was disseminated electronically during a 7-week period January 11, 2005 through February 28, 2005 via the NARHA website, the driving and therapeutic riding Yahoo listserv groups, and directly through e-mail.  There were 62 e-mail requests for the survey.  59 total survey responses were received through the post office and e-mail representing 8 countries:  USA, Canada, UK (England, Ireland, Scotland), Belgium, Italy, and Austria.  Out of the 59 responses received, one center from the USA had a multiple response to the survey and the duplicate was eliminated with statistics being gathered from the remaining 58 surveys. 

Program affiliations from survey respondents included:  NARHA (North American Riding for the Handicapped Association), RDA (Riding for the Disabled Association), FRDI (Federation of Riding for the Disabled International), Driving for the Disabled, Special Olympics, CHA (Certified Horsemanship Association), and “None” (no program affiliation).  In 2003, 45 out of a total of 692 NARHA Centers indicated they completed therapeutic driving.  18 NARHA driving programs answered the 2005 driving survey, representing roughly 40% of the NARHA Centers that drive.

The survey outlined the following definitions for both “driving” and “disabilities”:  “Horse Driving Activities may include long lining, practicing on a rein board, harnessing, and driving an equine in a cart, carriage, or similar vehicle”; and “Disabilities may include physical, psychological, cognitive, sensory, or behavioral”.  Respondents were then asked to answer “yes” or “no” to the following question: “Do you participate in any form of driving activities with people with disabilities?”  Those who answered “yes” were invited to complete the survey questions. 

33 respondents checked "YES” they do complete driving activities with people with disabilities and 25 answered "NO".

Besides survey statistics, the various program’s additional written comments provide useful information as well.  For example one respondent wrote, “After looking at your survey, I realized it was for therapeutic programs, which our center is not. Although we have employed people with behavioral and psychological problems, our main thrust is the training of Harness Horses.  There are no equipment changes to protect or teach our employees, per se.  Sorry we couldn't take the survey but none of the questions applied to this facility.  Please do send me a brochure when you complete it! I'm interested in anything NARHA is doing to further therapeutic driving.” 

CHA had no driving respondents but a committee member sent the following:  “I am chairing a committee for Certified Horsemanship Assoc. to develop a certification program for drivers of horses and mules. I would be very interested in the findings of your survey and wonder if you could pass those findings on to me?  Thank you and I hope you have an overwhelming response!”  One person representing Special Olympics noted they are interested in beginning a driving program and asked, “Is there any way to get the results of this survey to potentially give us some guidance in starting a program?”

Two responses, one from the United Kingdom and the other from Italy, reflected information regarding several centers rather than just one program. In addition to three individual survey responses from RDA programs in England and Scotland, the RDA Carriage Driving Committee Secretary sent data representative of all 100 RDA driving Groups in the UK (England, Scotland, and Ireland): “Please find attached answers to your recent survey. Unfortunately it is not possible to send it to all of our Groups of carriage drivers, so I have completed it as best I can, on behalf of all our Groups.  We would also be very interested in the results of the survey.  Many thanks.”  And the survey from Italy came with the message, “Unfortunately in Italy we don't complete driving for the disabled.  Many regards.”

Approximately four years ago NARHA implemented new requirements for programs utilizing driving.  This process resulted in “growth pains” evidenced by five respondents from NARHA who noted they had an active driving program but due to changes regarding driving instructor certification they have put driving on hold; 1 respondent left NARHA and is driving on their own; 2 respondents are working toward their NARHA driving certification; and 2 respondents not currently driving under NARHA chose to answer the survey with answers placed under the “no program affiliation” category. Concern from NARHA centers was expressed with the implementation of new requirements for certification of driving instructors and the resulting time and expense incurred with certification, as well as with the availability of certification clinics.
return to top of page

 

 

Survey Statistics

N/A = No Answer or Not Applicable

 

Many category percentages add up to a total of 100% and represent the mean or average for the number of total responses given for that category.  These scores show a ready comparison of the most and least popular responses given.

 

*Starred percentages reflect answers that were calculated using the formula x# programs giving the answer/ x# total programs and NOT the average of x# of multiple responses, thus, these percentage numbers will not add up to 100.  For example 2 out of 5 programs drive indoors some of the time and 5 out of those 5 programs drive outdoors – the percentage for driving indoors would be 40% and the percentage for outdoors would be 100%.  These scores indicate how many or how few programs complete the given question.

return to top of page

 

 

# Of “YES” Survey Respondents and their Program Affiliations

18  NARHA (USA and Canada) – North American Riding for the Handicapped Assoc.

4    RDA (UK) – Riding for the Disabled Association

1    FRDI (Europe) – Federation of Riding for the Disabled International

2   (USA) Driving for the Disabled + 2 (UK which are also RDA programs) 

0    CHA (USA) – Certified Horsemanship Association

0    Other – Special Olympics (USA)

8    None – No program affiliation (USA)
return to top of page

 

                                                Harness Information

 

 

Program Affiliation ®

Surveyed Area ¯

 

 

NARHA

 

 

RDA

 

 

FRDI

 

 

DFD

 

None

(No Program Affiliation)

Combined Statistics for all North American Programs

 

Combined

Statistics for all Survey Respondents

HARNESS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Draft Harness

20%

-0-

No

20%

29%

24%

20%

Pleasure Harness

70%

34%

Yes

30%

50%

56%

54%

Marathon Harness

10%

33%

No

30%

-0-

10%

13%

Fine/ Show Harness

-0-

33%

No

20%

21%

10%

13%

Race Harness

-0-

-0-

No

-0-

-0-

-0-

-0-

Harness Materials

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Leather Harness

54%

30%

Yes

40%

78%

57%

53%

Synthetic Harness

46%

70%

No

60%

22%

43%

47%

# Respondents Utilizing Adapted Reins*

100%

100%

N/A

75%

75%

89%

91%

Double Reins Program Use

94%

100%

N/A

75%

57%

82%

84%

Ladder Rein Program Use

17%

100%

N/A

50%

13%

14%

25%

Loop Rein Program Use

39%

75%

N/A

50%

25%

32%

38%

Knotted Rein Program Use

39%

-0-

N/A

-0-

25%

32%

28%

Braided Rein Program Use

17%

25%

N/A

25%

13%

14%

16%

           

  Harness Summary 
Leather is the traditional driving harness for the horse’s comfort, however new improved synthetics and synthetic & leather harness combinations are on the market.  Muffy Seaton, driving trainer and clinician, writes in a Q & A section of www.northtexaswhip.org/askmuffy2.html: I have found the synthetic harness simplifies my life by giving me more time. I use Tedman webbing harness at home and Zilco harness at the shows. The Tedman webbing harness has a few drawbacks: It can rub the hair off where the traces come in contact with the horses' hind legs and it takes forever to dry after washing, which negates the easiness of washing it (you have to let it dry on a fence for a couple of days). The Zilco, on the other hand, is waterproof, so you can just hose it down and wipe it dry. I LOVE MY ZILCO HARNESS! It takes me three days to properly clean my leather 4-in-hand harness, including the brass. It takes me half an hour or so to do the Zilco.  About half of therapeutic driving programs choose leather only harness and half choose synthetic with a couple of programs specifically writing in that they use a Zilco Harness.  Pleasure harness was the overwhelming choice for the majority of programs and no program indicated using race harness.  Both synthetic and leather harnesses were equally used with 2-wheel and 4-wheel carriages and with different horse types.  The vast majority of programs surveyed utilized adapted reins of some type.  Nearly all programs used double reins but only half of those used double reins 100% of the time (see chart outlining “Other Interesting Statistics”), thus there are many lessons where only one set of reins are used – either by the AB whip or by the student.  One program noted they drive severely disabled students for the sensory experience, thus in that example, there would be one set of driving lines held by the AB whip.  Other programs indicated advancing some driving students to independent driving lessons and thus in that example, there would be one set of driving lines held by the student.

Harness Survey Norms: 
Leather or Synthetic Pleasure Harness; Use of Double Reins for Lessons
return to top of page

 
 
Driving Vehicles

THE DRIVING VEHICLE

NARHA

RDA

FRDI

DFD

None

America

All Programs

Primary Carriage

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2 – wheel

55%

33%

Yes

60%

63%

56%

55%

4 – wheel

45%

67%

-0-

40%

37%

44%

45%

Wheelchair Accessible

55%

100%

No

50%

50%

50%

53%

Equipped with Brakes

45%

33%

Yes

40%

37%

44%

45%

Vehicle # 2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2 – wheel

67%

100%

N/A

50%

50%

63%

68%

4 – wheel

33%

-0-

N/A

50%

50%

37%

32%

Wheelchair Accessible

50%

67%

N/A

50%

50%

50%

53%

Equipped with Brakes

42%

-0-

N/A

50%

50%

44%

37%

Vehicle # 3

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2 – wheel

100%

N/A

N/A

100%

100%

100%

100%

4 – wheel

-0-

N/A

N/A

-0-

-0-

-0-

-0-

Wheelchair Accessible

14%

N/A

N/A

-0-

-0-

11%

11%

Equipped with Brakes

-0-

N/A

N/A

-0-

-0-

-0-

-0-

ALL Program Used Vehicles

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2 – wheel

68%

67%

Yes

62%

64%

64%

65%

4 – wheel

32%

33%

No

38%

36%

36%

35%

Wheelchair Accessible

46%

83%

No

43%

43%

39%

42%