· Public charity
Two Pups Wellness Fund
We provide a vital community resource by giving financial assistance through our shelters and rescues to those animals who have been injured, neglected and/or abandoned that are in need of life-saving care.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2022–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 18 grants below total $206,066 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $293,666 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $87,600 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k11 grants · $87k
- $10k–50k7 grants · $119k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| STEALING HEARTS | $27,170 |
| HARTT INC | $25,985 |
| K9 KONNECTION | $15,684 |
| ALONE NO MORE DOG RESCUE INC | $14,000 |
| FEDWELL FARM RESCUE INC | $12,600 |
| FOREVER FRIENDS HUMANE SOCIETY | $12,575 |
| PAWS 4 LIFE AZ | $10,800 |
| PAWS 4 A CAUSE | $9,980 |
| TAILS OF LOVE RESCUE | $9,200 |
| NAGI FOUNDATION INC | $9,150 |
| DESERT DOG PROJECT | $8,800 |
| HEART OF INFINITY FOUNDATION | $8,100 |
| 2ND CHANCE DOG RESCUE INC | $8,000 |
| UNDERDOG RESCUE OF AZ | $7,450 |
| DIAMOND & DAISY PROJECT | $7,272 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY25–25, $9k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +51% since the first grant, against +17% for the ones you funded once.
11 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 14 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 30% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $144k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- OAOTHER ANIMAL RESCUE NFPS2× · 2023–2024 · $89k
- SHSTEALING HEARTS RESCUE INC3× · 2022–2025 · $60k · revenue +51%
- PFPAWS FOR A CAUSE3× · 2022–2024 · $42k
Funded once
- HFHarris Family Foundationone grant, 2024 · $9k · revenue 0%
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2024 · $8k
- RRROTTEN ROTTIE RESCUE INCone grant, 2024 · $8k · revenue 0%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
Animal rescue
Saving dogs
We are dedicated to rescuig animals left homeless for whatever reason, animals in public shelters where they are at high risk of euthanasia, animals given up by their owners because of difficult circumstances, and those in danger of abuse…
Rescue dogs, which includes housing, vetting, and transport.
Find homes for homeless/abandoned dogs. Provide full vet car and housing while awaiting adoption,
foster based dog rescue working with shelters to save dogs
Animal rescue
The rescue and rehabilitation of canines.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Better Days Inc and the most unlike its peers is Harris Family Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 6 years old; the field is 11. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 30% startups (under 5 years old) — 33% of your grantees by number, and just 24% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 17% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
16 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 16 of the 30 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds STEALING HEARTS RESCUE INC ↗
- Who funds HIGH DESERT HUMANE SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds HARTT INC ↗
- Who funds K9 KONNECTION ↗
- Who funds ALONE NO MORE DOG RESCUE INC ↗
- Who funds LOVE THEM ALL ↗
- Who funds PAWS 4 A CAUSE ↗
- Who funds Harris Family Foundation ↗
- Who funds TAILS OF LOVE RESCUE ↗
- Who funds Nagi Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds DESERT DOG PROJECT ↗
- Who funds 2ND CHANCE DOG RESCUE ↗
- Who funds ROTTEN ROTTIE RESCUE INC ↗
- Who funds Better Days Inc ↗
- Who funds FOREVER LOVED PET SANCTUARY ↗
- Who funds NEW LEASH ON LIFE ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Arizona Community Foundation · Phoenix Animal Care Coalition PACC911 · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · American Express Foundation · Network for Good · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Amazonsmile Foundation
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Two Pups Wellness Fund funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Two Pups Wellness Fund?
Find your warmest path to Two Pups Wellness Fund 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.