National Mill Dog Rescue

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
260574783
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Colorado Springs, CO, USA
Phone
7196833334
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Amateur Sports

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,021,906
Expenses
$4,077,829
Assets
$9,661,871
Liabilities
$160,326

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • THERESA STRADER: $127,240 total reported compensation
  • SARAH JANE ALLENSWORTH THOMPSON: $81,516 total reported compensation
  • Kelly Rose Stoneburner: $72,729 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To rescue, rehabilitate and re-home discarded breeding dogs and to educate the general public about the cruel realities of the commercial dog breeding industry.

What it reported doing in 2025

Our adoption and foster care program. These programs are managed by paid staff, including a manager of adoption programs, foster care coordinator and adoptions counselor. At the end of the year, we had 46 foster caregivers registered. Each caregiver is thoroughly trained and constantly supported. The average length of stay for a dog in foster care is 197 days. These dogs may be highly fearful and require time to adjust to normal lives or may need time for recovery from surgery or other veterinary procedures before being made available for adoption. Nmdr pays all expenses. Potential adopters of our dogs are carefully screened through a thorough online application that includes questions about lifestyle, expectations, home environment pets past and present, family members and more. This first step helps us determine how likely it is that an applicant could provid an appropriate home for a puppy mill survivor. Potential adopters are sent a video that includes descriptions of behaviors that are common and sometimes difficult in our population of dogs. Applicants participate in a phone interview and photos of fenced yards and gates are requested. If deemed appropriate they are approved to adopt and invited to schedule a meet and greet at our rescue facility. Overcoming the behavioral challenges of some puppy mill survivors is not for everyone, which is why our intensive adoption process is necessary. Our goal is to ensure that through our very best efforts, we are selecting only the finest permanent homes for our dogs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 89% 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 75
  • Sustainability: 70
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 59.5%; rating input score 60
  • Program expense ratio: 84%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $25.73 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 11th 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: 57.1%; rating input score 57; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 32.3%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.37; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.9%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.2% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.1% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.7% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 59.5% of revenue deployed · 84% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $3.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $127K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 57/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.