Skip to content
Two Pups Wellness Fund at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· 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.

$294k
Granted FY2025still arriving
18
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$27k
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, FY2022 to 2025.

Animals$551kEducation$9k
02FY2025 · 18 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 18 grants below total $206,066, the rows itemized in this filing. The $293,666 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $87,600 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k11 grants · $87k
  • $10k–50k7 grants · $119k
$9,200
Median grant
1
States reached
$665k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
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
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:

Its 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 its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%NAGI FOUNDATION INC: $9k → 11%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.

68%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$379k · 11 repeat orgs$182k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +51% since the first grant, against +17% for those 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

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
5

Total granted

$379k
$38k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+51%
+17%

Still filing today

36%
80%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 30% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $144k went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’22’23’24’25
AnimalsHuman ServicesEducationOther
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

  • OA
    OTHER ANIMAL RESCUE NFPS
    2× · 2023–2024 · $89k
  • SH
    STEALING HEARTS RESCUE INC
    3× · 2022–2025 · $60k · revenue +51%
  • PF
    PAWS FOR A CAUSE
    3× · 2022–2024 · $42k

Funded once

  • HF
    Harris Family Foundation
    one grant, 2024 · $9k · revenue 0%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2024 · $8k
  • RR
    ROTTEN ROTTIE RESCUE INC
    one grant, 2024 · $8k · revenue 0%
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
Desert Dog Rescue Inc

Animal rescue

Animals
2
Donna's Love Pet Rescue
Animals
3
Raskels Rescue
Animals
4
St Clouds Rescue
Animals
5
Forgotten Tails Animal Rescue Inc

Saving dogs

Animals
6
Angies Dog House

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…

Animals
7
Purple Paws 2nd Chance Rescue
Animals
8
Fred's Mission Rescue and Sanctuary

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

Animals
9
Pets Without Partners

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

Animals
10
Shelters and Shelves Rescue Inc

foster based dog rescue working with shelters to save dogs

Animals
11
Four Paws One Heart

Animal rescue

Animals
12
Where the Wild Things Are Rescue in

The rescue and rehabilitation of canines.

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Better Days Inc; 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.
04the grantee network

16 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. 16 of the 30 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/16
Grantees still filing
6/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

OTHER ANIMAL RESCUE NFPS: $89,221 · OtherOTHER ANIMAL RESCUE NFPSPAWS FOR A CAUSE: $42,216 · OtherPAWS FOR A CAUSEFEDWELL FARM RESCUE INC: $35,700 · OtherFEDWELL FARM RESCUE INCIndividual grant recipient: $29,455 · OtherIndividual grant recipientFUR THE PAWS INC: $26,840 · OtherFUR THE PAWS INCIndividual grant recipient: $22,905 · OtherIndividual grant recipientFOREVER FRIENDS HUMANE SOCIETY: $12,575 · Other2ND CHANCE RESCUE: $12,100 · OtherPAWS 4 LIFE AZ: $10,800 · Other+5 more: $36,872 · Other+5 moreSTEALING HEARTS RESCUE INC: $59,764 · AnimalsSTEALING HEARTS RESCUE INCHIGH DESERT HUMANE SOCIETY: $26,850 · AnimalsHIGH DESERT HUMANE SOCIETYHARTT INC: $25,985 · AnimalsHARTT INCK9 KONNECTION: $21,059 · AnimalsK9 KONNECTIONALONE NO MORE DOG RESCUE INC: $14,000 · AnimalsALONE NO MORE DOG RESCUE INCLOVE THEM ALL: $12,650 · AnimalsLOVE THEM ALLPAWS 4 A CAUSE: $9,980 · AnimalsTAILS OF LOVE RESCUE: $9,200 · AnimalsDESERT DOG PROJECT: $8,800 · AnimalsROTTEN ROTTIE RESCUE INC: $8,000 · Animals2ND CHANCE DOG RESCUE: $8,000 · Animals+3 more: $19,320 · Animals+3 moreHarris Family Foundation: $9,350 · EducationNagi Foundation Inc: $9,150 · Human Services
Other$318,684Animals$223,608Education$9,350Human Services$9,150

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSTEALING HEARTS RESCUE INC: $59,764 over 3y, 7.5% of budgetHIGH DESERT HUMANE SOCIETY: $26,850 over 2y, 4.4% of budgetK9 KONNECTION: $21,059 over 2y, 1.7% of budgetLOVE THEM ALL: $12,650 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetPAWS 4 A CAUSE: $9,980 over 1y, 11% of budgetHarris Family Foundation: $9,350 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetROTTEN ROTTIE RESCUE INC: $8,000 over 1y, 4.1% of budget2ND CHANCE DOG RESCUE: $8,000 over 1y, 3.3% of budgetBetter Days Inc: $6,500 over 1y, 3.6% of budgetFOREVER LOVED PET SANCTUARY: $6,420 over 1y, 1.5% 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.

  • 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 ROTTEN ROTTIE RESCUE INC ↗
  • Who funds 2ND CHANCE DOG RESCUE ↗
  • Who funds Better Days Inc ↗
  • Who funds FOREVER LOVED PET SANCTUARY ↗
  • Who funds NEW LEASH ON LIFE ↗

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.

Arizona Community Fou…Phoenix Animal Care C…Paypal Charitable Giv…American Express Foun…Network for GoodThe Bank of America C…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
Arizona Community FoundationAZ23.1× affinity10 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

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

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 Two Pups Wellness Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Two Pups Wellness Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%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
    0get no government money at all
    1report 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 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.

    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 30 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Two Pups Wellness’ 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