The Dog Aging Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
934834347
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Jamaica Plain, MA, USA
Phone
2067472230
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and/or Public Policy Analysis

Reported finances

Revenue
$482,062
Expenses
$158,491
Assets
$343,720
Liabilities
$20,149

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KATEE CREEVY (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • KATEE CREEVY (PRESIDENT)
  • MATT KAEBERLEIN (SECRETARY)
  • DANIEL E PROMISLOW (TREASURER)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Inspired by the power of the human-companion dog bond, the non-profit dog aging institute promotes, supports and sustains research into healthy aging in companion dogs by generating financial support, facilitating partnerships, and developing educational resources. The institute works to enhance public enthusiasm for innovative research discoveries that help people and their dogs live healthier, longer lives. Funds raised by the institute are given as grants to enable basic research, dissemination of findings, and use of new knowledge to benefit dogs, their owners and the veterinary community.

What it reported doing in 2024

During the 2024 calendar year, the dog aging institute launched its first major fundraising campaigns, and successfully raised funds through several large donations, in addition to small donor contributions. We also made our first donations to researchers working on the biology of aging in dogs. On dec 6, 2024, the dog aging institute made a 30,000 contribution to Arizona state university. These funds were used by dr. Noah snyder-mackler to support measuring and analyzing the canine blood epigenome in samples from dogs enrolled in the dog aging project. On oct 9, 2024, the dog aging institute made a 60,000 contribution to the university of Washington. These funds were used by dr. Dan raftery in the northwest metabolomics research center to measure metabolome profiles in blood samples from dogs enrolled in the dog aging project.

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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 45
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 75
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 28.5%; rating input score 29
  • Program expense ratio: 86.8%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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; 63rd 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: 67.1%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.17; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

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

Details

  • Where the money goes: 28.5% of revenue deployed · 86.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $138K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 1 filing year from 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 29/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.