Mobility Service Dogs - West Coast Project

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
824426022
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2018
Location
Pasadena, CA, USA
Phone
6264707742
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Health Program (Includes General Health and Wellness Promotion Services)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$951,313
Expenses
$908,334
Assets
$226,525
Liabilities
$41,862

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JANIE HEINRICH (CEO)
  • AIKO TAN (PRESIDENT GOVERNANCE)

People named in this filing

  • JANIE HEINRICH (CEO)
  • AIKO TAN (PRESIDENT GOVERNANCE)
  • HOLLY MILLER (TREASUER)

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

MobilityDog advances FUNctional independence for people with disablities through service dogs, education and empowerment.

What it reported doing in 2025

Educational Outreach - PAWS that Empower, WAGS, and Reading Circle MobilityDog delivered disability education workshops across 10 California districts, reaching 268 special education and 938 low-income students. PAWS that Empower teaches about disabilities, service dog roles, and building confidence and independence through STEAM and SEL frameworks. Reading Circle promotes literacy, empathy, and inclusion through interactive reading and art in schools, libraries, and elder care settings. WAG workshops train businesses and agencies on public access, legal rights, and best practices for interacting with service dog teams. Topics across all programs include integrity, equality, empathy, tolerance, equity, compassion, accessibility, confidence, community inclusion, and understanding the daily barriers faced by people with disabilities. All programs are adaptable for virtual delivery as needed. 2025 Impact PAWS- 923 students, WAG- 20 businesses 756 individuals, Reading Circle- 580 people in 28 locations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.9%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 80.6%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $21.29 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.5%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.25; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 21.5% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76.9% of revenue deployed · 80.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $732K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2019 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 57/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.