Skip to content
Best Pets Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Best Pets Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$43k
Granted FY2022
2
Grants FY2022
1
States reached
$28k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2022.

Animals$426k
02FY2022 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$27,928
Median grant
1
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HUMANE SOCIETY OF THE SOUTH PLATTE VALLEY$27,928
ANIMAL HELP NOW$15,000
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY20–22) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 63% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%HAVE A HEART ANIMAL WELFARE FUND: $14k → 16%NM DOG: $8k → 14%HOPE FOR HOOVES: $8k → 16%SNIP COLLIER: $100k → 10%DMK REHOMING: $10k → 7%HUMANE SOCIETY OF THE SOUTH PLATTE VALLEY: $28k → 8%LIGHTSHINE CANINE: $20k → 12%RED FERN ANIMAL RESCUE: $8k → 12%AWR CAT TAILS RESCUE: $8k → 15%HUMANE SOCIETY OF FREEMONT COUNTY: $8k → 17%LOST DOG FOUNDATION: $25k → 22%NM DOG: $5k → 14%DMK REHOMING: $8k → 7%HUMANE SOCIETY OF THE SOUTH PLATTE VALLEY INC: $25k → 8%LIGHTSHINE CANINE: $13k → 12%SOCCER PANTS SENIOR PAWS: $3k → 12%HUMANE SOCIETY OF THE SOUTH PLATTE VALLEY INC: $25k → 8%ANIMAL HELP NOW: $15k → 12%SOUL DOG: $57k → 8%ANIMAL HELP NOW: $15k → 12%ANIMAL HELP NOW: $15k → 12%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

46%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$198k · 6 repeat orgs$229k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +26% since the first grant, against +9% for those funded once.

6 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2022, 4 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
9

Total granted

$198k
$229k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+26%
+9%

Still filing today

100%
44%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2022, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22
RenewedFirst-time
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as new. Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.

Backed again, and grew

  • HS
    HUMANE SOCIETY OF THE SOUTH PLATTE VALLEY INC
    3× · 2020–2022 · $78k · revenue +86%
  • AH
    ANIMAL HELP NOW (formerly Animal Watch)
    3× · 2020–2022 · $45k · revenue +168%
  • GP
    GIVING PAW INC
    2× · 2020–2021 · $13k · revenue +18%

Funded once

  • SNIP Collier Incgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $100k · revenue +187%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2020 · $57k
  • LD
    Lost Dog Foundation
    one grant, 2021 · $25k · revenue +4%
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Hope Fur Paws Rescue

To help injured, abandoned and unwanted animals. We provide food, vet care that includes heartworm prevention and spay or neuter services, shelter and anything else needed.

Animals
2
Pets Without Partners

Find homes for homeless/abandoned dogs. Provide full vet car and housing while awaiting adoption,

Animals
3
St Clouds Rescue
Animals
4
Forgotten Tails Animal Rescue Inc

Saving dogs

Animals
5
Safe Haven Inc
Animals
6
Pom and the Hound Animal Refuge

Animal Welfare

—
7
Their Lives Matter

Dog rescue and care nurturing finding a home

Animals
8
Donna's Love Pet Rescue
Animals
9
Almost Home Canine Rescue

Resuce, care and adopting canines

Animals
10
Fred's Mission Rescue and Sanctuary

Rescue dogs, which includes housing, vetting, and transport.

Animals
11
Desert Dog Rescue Inc

Animal rescue

Animals
12
Pets Return Home

The organization seeks to reduce the unecessary killing and suffering of healthy adoptable dogs at animal rescue and shelter organizations

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Nmdog Inc; the most unlike its peers is Lightshine Canine Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

10 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 10 of the 15 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
7/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SNIP Collier Inc: $100,000 · AnimalsSNIP Collier IncHUMANE SOCIETY OF THE SOUTH PLATTE VALLEY INC: $77,928 · AnimalsHUMANE SOCIETY OF THE SOUTH PLATTE VALLEY INCANIMAL HELP NOW (formerly Animal Watch): $45,000 · AnimalsANIMAL HELP NOW (formerly Animal Watch)Lightshine Canine Inc: $32,500 · AnimalsLightshine Canine IncLost Dog Foundation: $25,000 · AnimalsLost Dog FoundationDMK REHOMING INC: $17,500 · AnimalsGIVING PAW INC: $12,500 · AnimalsNMDOG Inc: $12,500 · Animals+2 more: $15,000 · AnimalsIndividual grant recipient: $57,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipi…HAVE A HEART ANIMAL WELFARE FUND INC: $14,000 · OtherHAVE A HEART ANIMAL WEL…HOPE FOR HOOVES: $7,500 · OtherHOPE FOR HOOVESAWR CAT TAILS RESCUE: $7,500 · OtherAWR CAT TAILS RESCUE+1 more: $2,500 · Other
Animals$337,928Other$88,500

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSNIP Collier Inc: $100,000 over 1y, 22% of budgetHUMANE SOCIETY OF THE SOUTH PLATTE VALLEY INC: $77,928 over 3y, 2.6% of budgetANIMAL HELP NOW (formerly Animal Watch): $45,000 over 3y, 11% of budgetLost Dog Foundation: $25,000 over 1y, 15% of budgetDMK REHOMING INC: $17,500 over 2y, 9.8% of budgetNMDOG Inc: $12,500 over 2y, 2.4% of budgetRED FERN ANIMAL RESCUE: $7,500 over 1y, 5.3% of budgetHUMANE SOCIETY OF FREMONTCOUNTY INC: $7,500 over 1y, 0.9% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

National Philanthropi…Network for GoodPaypal Charitable Giv…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
National Philanthropic TrustPA12.4× affinity9 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · Network for Good · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Best Pets Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Best Pets Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%2%6%14%25%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12 to 24 months.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Best Pets Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Best Pets Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 15 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2022, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Best Pets’ filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home