The Good Dog Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
113466707
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Official website data refreshed
Aug 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Hudson, NY, USA
Phone
(888) 859-9992
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,227,795
Expenses
$1,188,176
Assets
$385,337
Liabilities
$597,405

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

Leadership & pay

26 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RACHEL MCPHERSON (FOUNDER/PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • BRUCE FAGIN (EXEC. DIRECTOR- CHIEF ADVA): $134,667 total reported compensation
  • RACHEL MCPHERSON (FOUNDER/PRESIDENT): $126,667 total reported compensation
  • TIAROSE BIASI (VP OF BUSINESS DEV): $67,400 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To train and certify dog-human teams to provide therapy visits that ease human suffering and support learning, leveraging the human-animal bond.

What it reported doing in 2024

Research and awareness - with major academic and scientific partners, good dog conducts research to assess the effects of therapy dog interventions on specific populations and environments to help build an evidence base for the industry. Recent studies include: 1) a long-term study with mount sinai medical center in nyc that assessed aat for patients with advance throat and neck cancers. The findings published in the peer-reviewed journal of community and supportive oncology proved that patients spending therapeutic time with therapy dogs during radiation and chemotherapy had improved emotional and social wellbeing vs those who didn't. Good dog disseminated the findings broadly through online, broadcast and print media aimed at healthcare professionals and the general public. 2) a study with yale university parenting center examined the role of dogs to help lower stress in children. 3) a study with pace university department of criminal justice assessing the value of using specially trained good dog therapy teams as part of an in-prision parenting program for female inmates who will be reuniting with their minor children. 4) a survey with the university of Pennsylvania school of veterinary medicine providing the first-ever-in-depth analysis of therapy dog training methods on a national basis. In addition, goodd dog regularly confers, asks for and/or shares information with scientists and academians including those associated with universities, pet care industry groups, human-animal interaction associations, and the national institutes of health.during the pandemic, the good dog foundation was forced to cease its mission-driven programmatic operations (therapy dog visits and certification training) and cancel our chief fundraiser, our annual gala. The result was the loss of nearly half our annual revenue. Fortunately, the organization was able to take advantage of the cares act sba loan program, which allowed us to retain all our employees and redirect our attention to building a new, more effective website and other "infrastructure" enhancements so that we would be ready to provide our vital emotional support activities as soon as the ban on in-person intervention at hospitals, schools and nursing homes was relaxed. The sba loan has helped the organization move from pandemic struggling to post pandemic thriving. We are rebuilding our certified therapy dog volunteer team (now over 320 certified teams) and working with over 200 facilities not only hospitals, schools and nursing homes but with businesses needing post pandemic workforce wellness help.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 84% 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 a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.3%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 71.6%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.1 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.2%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.32; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.55; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 27.7%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 69.3% of revenue deployed · 71.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 22 of 24 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $851K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $135K · 26 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • 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 27/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.