Protecting Paws for Life

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
994510489
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2024
Location
Largo, FL, USA
Phone
7134105314
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal-Related N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$15,918
Expenses
$16,478
Assets
$7,075
Liabilities
$815

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Andria Gibbon (President)
  • Debbie Houk (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Andria Gibbon (President)
  • Debbie Houk (Vice President)
  • Crystal Dennestedt (Board Chair)

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

Protecting Paws for Life is a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization, operating in the state of Florida, dedicated to supporting domestic violence shelters in becoming or maintaining fear free pet-friendly environments. Our mission is to ensure that families in crisis can stay together with their pets; preventing pets from being left behind and facing potential abuse, neglect, or even death, as well as avoiding being turned over to an already overpopulated and overburdened animal shelter system.

What it reported doing in 2025

Supply delivery - each month, each shelter places an order for supplies needed for pets in their care and/or for individual survivors needing supplies. We deliver any items needed including food, bowls, beds, crates, carriers, leashes, collars, harnesses, toys, treats, litter, litter boxes, scratching posts, flea/tick treatment, potty pads, blankets and grooming supplies. Most of the supplies are donated to us through community outreach. Veterinary Care - we provide for wellness care requested through our partners. We cover basic wellness, vaccines, supplements and minor infections such as eye, ear, skin.

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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.1%; rating input score 73
  • Program expense ratio: 70.6%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.24 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • 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: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3.5%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.43; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 14; 14th 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: 73.1% of revenue deployed · 70.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $12K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 15 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 51/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 14/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.