Certification and Assessment Framework

Accommodation providers apply for assessment by submitting a completed Dog Friendly Assessment (RDFASS-01) along with any required supporting information.

Submitting an application is a declaration that the information provided is accurate, complete, and representative of how the accommodation actually operates.

Submitting an application does not confer certification status and does not create any entitlement to certification.

Assessments are based on operator provided responses to the Dog Friendly Assessment (RDFASS-01), publicly available information including published dog policies, terms and conditions, booking platform listings, and direct booking pages, and any supplementary information requested during the assessment process.

Roch Dog does not routinely conduct on site inspections. Roch Dog does not verify individual guest experiences or rely on guest reviews as assessment evidence. Certification reflects the policies and operational representations made publicly available to prospective guests.

Where inconsistencies or conflicts show up between submitted survey responses and publicly available information, Roch Dog may request written clarification from the applicant, amend the assessment outcome based on clarification received, or suspend the assessment until the issue is resolved.

Where submitted information materially misrepresents the accommodation's actual policies or operations, Roch Dog may decline to certify or withdraw certification already granted.

Where marketing claims and documented operational policy conflict, operational policy takes precedence. A hotel that markets itself as dog friendly but whose published booking policies say otherwise will not be certified on the strength of the marketing claim.

All assessments are conducted against the requirements of RDFS-02 using the question set in RDFASS-01. Outcomes are binary: Certified means all minimum requirements in RDFS-02 are satisfied. Not Certified means one or more minimum requirements are not satisfied.

There are no partial certifications, conditional passes, provisional outcomes, or tiered certification levels.

Certification reflects a point in time assessment. It does not guarantee ongoing compliance and may be updated at any time if material changes occur.

Every assessment outcome is recorded in a Certification Decision Note (RDCDN-01). The note states the outcome (Certified or Not Certified), identifies any failed requirements, lists the primary evidence reviewed, and records the date of assessment.

The note may be shared with the applicant and where appropriate with third parties. It is not an advisory document and does not include recommendations, suggestions, or consultancy.

Certified properties are subject to periodic reassessment. Frequency is determined by Roch Dog and may vary by provider.

Certified providers must notify Roch Dog of any material changes to their dog policies, access conditions, fees, or operational practices that may affect certification status. Failure to notify may result in suspension or withdrawal.

Roch Dog may initiate a reassessment at any time in response to provider notification of material change, credible evidence of non conformance, scheduled periodic review, or significant changes to the applicable version of RDFS-02.

Certification may be suspended or withdrawn where the accommodation no longer meets the minimum requirements of RDFS-02, where previously identified issues have not been resolved within a reasonable period, where the provider submitted materially inaccurate or misleading information, or where the provider fails to respond to clarification requests within a reasonable period.

On withdrawal, the provider must immediately stop using the Roch Dog certification mark and remove any references to current certification status from all public facing materials.

A provider whose certification has been withdrawn may reapply after remediation. There is no entitlement to reinstatement.

A provider that receives a Not Certified outcome or whose certification has been withdrawn may request a review by submitting updated information or evidence that addresses the specific failed requirements identified in the Certification Decision Note.

Reviews are not appeals. They do not involve a re evaluation of the standard's requirements. Roch Dog's interpretation of RDFS-02 is final.

The Roch Dog certification mark may be used only by providers that are currently certified and in good standing.

Permitted use includes display on the provider's own website and booking pages, inclusion in direct marketing materials for the certified property, and display on third party listing platforms where the information is accurate and current.

The mark must not be used in a misleading way. It must not be applied to properties, rooms, or services not covered by the assessment, to time periods outside the current certification term, or to claims that go beyond the scope of certification such as quality or ranking claims.

On suspension or withdrawal of certification, all use of the mark must stop immediately.

Certification is not a self declaration. Roch Dog reviews structured evidence to confirm that what a hotel publishes matches what it provides.

Assessments draw on four categories of evidence.

Booking page review: the hotel's direct booking flow is checked for visible dog policy, fee disclosure, and weight or size statements. If a guest cannot find the dog policy within two clicks of the homepage, R1 fails.

Policy page capture: the full published dog policy is reviewed for completeness, consistency, and non discretionary language. Conditional statements, staff discretion clauses, and missing fee disclosures are flagged.

Pre arrival communication: where available, confirmation emails and pre arrival instructions are reviewed to check whether the published policy is consistent with what the guest receives after booking.

On site representation: publicly available evidence of on site practice, including photographs, guest facing signage, and third party documentation, may be reviewed where relevant.

Across 2,000+ assessments in 56 countries, five issues account for the majority of failures.

Undisclosed fees. The hotel charges a dog fee but does not state the amount on the booking page or in the published policy. This fails R4.

Weight restrictions not published before booking. The hotel enforces a weight limit that is not visible until check in or until the guest calls to ask. This fails R1.

No shared indoor access. The hotel permits dogs in rooms but bans them from every indoor shared space. Corridors and lifts do not count. This fails R3.

Discretionary rules. The policy states "at the discretion of management" or "subject to availability." Rules that vary by staff member or by day are not non discretionary.

Missing deposit disclosure. The hotel requires a damage deposit but does not state whether one applies or how much it is. This fails R5 and R6.

A four star hotel in Southern Europe listed "pet friendly" across three booking platforms. On review, its published policy imposed a 10kg weight limit not mentioned on any booking page, charged an undisclosed EUR 75 nightly fee, and restricted dogs to a single room type with no access to any shared indoor area. The hotel failed R1, R3, and R4. It scored F.

A five star hotel in Southeast Asia marketed itself as "welcoming dogs of all sizes." On review, the booking page contained no dog policy. The hotel's terms and conditions, accessible only through a PDF link in the footer, stated that dog acceptance was "subject to management approval." The hotel failed R1 and the non discretionary standard. It was Not Certified.

RDFS-02 Dog Friendly Standard. Defines dog friendly and sets minimum certification requirements. Takes precedence over everything else.

RDFRG-02 Defined Terms. Defines terms used in RDFS-02. Explanatory, not normative.

RDFASS-01 Dog Friendly Assessment. The canonical question set used in assessment.