Great Plains Mastiff Rescue
Legal name: Great Plains Mastiff Rescue Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 203939401
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2013–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Edmond, Oklahoma, US
- Phone
- 9192703316
- Rating
- 86
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Animal Protection and Welfare
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $75,953
- Expenses
- $61,170
- Assets
- $86,172
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MICHELLE BENNET (INTERIM PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- MICHELLE BENNET (INTERIM PRESIDENT)
- KRISTIN TANNER (TREASURER)
- JODIE KANMORE (SECRETARY)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Our mission is to educate about the Mastiff breed, rescue those at risk and help find caring foster homes and permanent families for ones in need.
What it reported doing in 2025
During 2020 mastiffs were surrendered by owners or transferred to the program from city/state shelters. Food, medical care, boarding, transportation, toys, beds, and other necessary items were provided for their care until a permanent home could be found.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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
STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 76
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 65
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 69.8%; rating input score 70
- Program expense ratio: 86.7%; rating input score 87
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 19.5%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.41; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 17.6% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site
- Where the money goes: 69.8% of revenue deployed · 86.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $53K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.