Pepper's Senior Dog Sanctuary

Legal name: Peppers Senior Dog Sanctuary

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
833612767
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Official website data refreshed
Jul 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2019
Location
Littleton, CO, US
Phone
303.222.0082
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,306,256
Expenses
$1,683,817
Assets
$1,748,717
Liabilities
$51

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARY LEPRINO (PRESIDENT/SE)

Highest reported compensation

  • COLLEEN FERRIMAN (MEDICAL DIRE): $129,330 total reported compensation
  • JUSTIN KLEMER (EXECUTIVE DI): $47,169 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 provide a loving, no-kill sanctuary for senior dogs, offering lifelong care, medical treatment, and a dignified end-of-life experience.

What it reported doing in 2025

Our sanctuary has become a place where healing flows in both directions. In 2025, we partnered with over 60 organizations, from autism support programs to senior centers. These partnerships allow us to bring the calming, grounding presence of senior dogs to people who benefit deeply from their companionship. Watching a member of our neuro diverse community gently read aloud to an aging chihuahua or seeing a senior citizen in memory care light up when a grey -muzzled pug climbs into their lap - these moments stay with you.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 94% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 81
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.8%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 70.2%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.15 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 15th 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: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -28.9%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.04; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.5%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 34% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.3% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 90.8% of revenue deployed · 70.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $129K · 10 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $106K reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 25/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 44/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 36/100.