Emotional support animal requests are no longer an occasional compliance issue for multifamily operators. They are becoming a regular part of the leasing workflow, and many property teams are realizing that the systems built to handle them were not designed for today’s volume.
According to the Multifamily Pet Management Trends Report, 75% of property management professionals say that the frequency of residents with emotional support animals has increased in the past five years. At the same time, 79% are concerned about fraud or misrepresentation of pets as service or support animals, and 53% believe animal misrepresentation has become more frequent.
That tension creates a difficult operational reality. Teams want to support residents with legitimate accommodation needs while protecting their communities from liability and lost revenue. They also need to keep applications moving.
The cost of slow verification
In many portfolios, ESA documentation review still relies on manual processes or external third parties that evaluate documentation before issuing a recommendation. While these approaches are intended to reduce risk, they can introduce delays that ripple through the leasing cycle.
Leasing teams are already stretched thin. The Multifamily Pet Management Trends Report shows that 50% of property management professionals spend too much time chasing residents for pet documentation, and 42% cannot quickly find pet information when issues come up. When ESA review adds days of waiting or extended back-and-forth communication, momentum can stall.
In competitive markets, time matters. Prospects expect fast answers. Properties depend on efficient application processing to protect occupancy and NOI. A review model that slows decision-making can unintentionally create friction for both staff and residents.
What many operators are now asking is whether there is a way to evaluate documentation thoroughly without putting leasing on pause.
Why consistency matters just as much as speed
Speed alone is not enough. Consistency has become equally important.
When documentation is reviewed manually or by rotating teams, outcomes can feel unpredictable. Staff may question whether every letter is being evaluated against the same standards. Residents may perceive inconsistency in how requests are handled. Over time, that variability can increase risk rather than reduce it.
Technology-assisted review models are gaining attention because they apply a standardized evaluation framework to every submission. Each document is assessed using the same criteria, which helps reduce subjectivity and ensures that potential anomalies are surfaced in a structured way. Instead of relying on individual interpretation at the first pass, teams receive organized information that highlights what requires attention.
This approach does not replace human judgment. It supports it. The goal is to ensure that the facts are gathered quickly and consistently so property teams can make informed decisions based on their policies.
As questions emerge across the industry about whether AI can be more consistent than humans, the practical answer lies in process design. Consistency comes from applying the same framework every time. Human professionals remain responsible for interpreting findings and determining outcomes.
Flexibility without outsourcing the decision
Another emerging conversation in multifamily centers on control.
Some ESA verification vendors in the market assume liability and issue approval or denial recommendations for reasonable accommodation requests related to emotional support animals on behalf of housing providers. While that structure may appear to reduce legal exposure, it can also create rigidity. If a third party is making determinations and they have an incentive to err on the side of caution, leasing teams may have limited flexibility in how they align decisions with internal policies or operational priorities.
A different philosophy is gaining traction. Rather than outsourcing the decision itself, technology can be used to gather and organize relevant information quickly, flag potential inconsistencies, and present structured findings directly to management. Property teams retain control over communication, next steps, and final determinations.
This model empowers operators to apply their own standards while maintaining visibility into the documentation review process. It also reduces the risk of applications getting stuck in extended verification cycles that neither staff nor residents fully understand.
In an environment where 93% of property management professionals say they allow pets in their communities, pet-friendly housing is no longer a differentiator, but operational excellence is.
Creating space for a better approach
The increase in ESA requests is unlikely to slow down. What will evolve is how multifamily teams respond.
Fast verification that keeps leasing moving. Consistent evaluation that applies the same standards every time. Flexible workflows that preserve operator control instead of transferring it elsewhere. These priorities are shaping the next phase of pet and accommodation management technology.
For operators exploring how documentation review can better align with leasing performance and policy consistency, more information about emerging approaches to pet management is available at foxen.com/petclear.
