Lew Dog Gives

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
334419356
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Pagosa Springs, CO, USA
Phone
3037266017
Rating
34
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal-Related N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$59,483
Expenses
$33,149
Assets
$26,334
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

People named in this filing

  • HOLLY MAZUR (FOUNDER & PR)
  • GREG FRITSCH (TREASURER)
  • LAUREN LAFORTUNA (VICE PRESIDE)

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 create a kinder world where all animals are safe, loved, and valued.

What it reported doing in 2025

The organization supports animals in need by funding organizations who provide medical care, shelter, food, and loveincluding local shelters, global sanctuaries, and compassionate individuals who devote their time to animal care.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 91% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 7
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 18
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 3.5%; rating input score 4
  • Program expense ratio: 6.7%; rating input score 7
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.3 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 9th 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: 20%; rating input score 20; 21st 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: 44.3%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.79; rating input score 24; 24th 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 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 3.5% of revenue deployed · 6.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 5 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 19 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 4/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 20/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 24/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grants require schedule f did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 24/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.