Home Fur Good Animal Rescue and Placement

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
270621954
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Phone
6029711334
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$661,514
Expenses
$775,281
Assets
$591,054
Liabilities
$244,745

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KEN SIMONELIC (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • LORETTA ISAAC (VICE PRESIDE)
  • KEN SIMONELIC (PRESIDENT)
  • LISA MARKS (TREASURER)

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

To eliminate euthanasia of treatable, adoptable dogs and cats in maricopa county through adoption, medical care, promotion of spay & neuter and owner education. Hfg also operates a low-cost vaccine/microchip clinic each week to provide low-cost way for community to keep their pets healthy and safe.

What it reported doing in 2025

Low cost dental clinic this program is offered to both the families who adopt home fur good pets and to the general public. It offers an affordable but important part of health care for both dogs and cats for their long term well being and prevention of dental diseases and related issues. By offering low cost professional teeth cleaning by a veterinarian in a fully equipped pet surgical environment pet owners can save money while still providing good care for their beloved animals.

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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 96%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: -17.2%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.76; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.41; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.3% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.5% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 96% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $744K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.