Doggie Protective Services for Homeless Tails

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
912164578
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2009
Location
Palo Alto, CA, USA
Phone
6506659833
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Reported finances

Revenue
$969,207
Expenses
$791,640
Assets
$260,644
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MELISSA BROWN (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • MELISSA BROWN (PRESIDENT)
  • VICTORIA McAULEY (SECRETARY)
  • TERA McCURRY (DIRECTOR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

We save dogs from kill shelters across California and adopted 940 dogs in 2025 Some are seniors, some are abused, some are left on doorsteps with severe medical needs which we address (broken legs, heart murmurs, gunshot wounds). Overall, 2025 was a year of significant growth, increased community involvement, and continued commitment to animals with complex medical, behavioral, and placement needs. Many of the cases DPS accepted required substantial financial resources, extended periods of veterinary care, specialized treatment, transportation, foster placement, and organizational coordination. Despite these challenges, the organization continued to expand its partnerships, develop new programs, support underserved members of the community, and provide lifesaving care and permanent homes for animals that might otherwise have had limited options.

What it reported doing in 2025

We also responded to a case involving a dog whose owner had become the subject of national news because of serious criminal activity involving crimes against law enforcement. At the request of a Northern California shelter, DPS agreed to take responsibility for the dog and provide housing and care while legal and ownership matters were resolved. Approximately three months later, the dog was formally released to DPS and was able to be placed. A significant area of our work continued to be community support. DPS maintained an ongoing program assisting unhoused individuals and families who were unable to consistently obtain food for their companion animals. Through donated resources, we distributed pet food on a monthly basis and developed relationships within the community that allowed volunteers, donors, and other organizations to participate in providing assistance. We continued strengthening our professional relationship with the San Jose Animal Care and Control agency, becoming one of its primary and most committed rescue partners and consistently assisting with the placement of dogs from the shelter. DPS also maintained active relationships with more than 25 animal shelters and municipalities throughout California from which we rescue animals. Our longstanding partnership with Pet Food Express also continued in 2025. This relationship, which has now extended for approximately 18 years, allowed DPS to conduct ongoing community adoption events in the Palo Alto area and continue connecting homeless dogs and cats with permanent families. We continued holding bi-weekly Meet and Greet adoption events, providing the community with opportunities to interact directly with adoptable animals and allowing dogs and cats who may not present well in photographs to connect with potential adopters. DPS also participated in the Salesforce convention in San Francisco, providing therapy and stress-relief interactions through our dogs. Our organization participated in the three-day event for more than 10 hours each day, giving attendees an opportunity to interact with the dogs while promoting the importance of animal welfare and rescue.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 70%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 85.6%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1,039.44 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 18.3%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.33; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.4% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 16.2% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.8% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 70% of revenue deployed · 85.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $678K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
  • Review — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization could not be resolved against the register, so the check is unfinished.