Utah Pet Partners

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
841407056
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
So Jordan, UT, USA
Phone
8017061389
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Centers to Support the Independence of Specific Populations

Reported finances

Revenue
$118,131
Expenses
$97,713
Assets
$117,616
Liabilities
$-378

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MELANY HILLSTEAD (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • MELANY HILLSTEAD (Executive Director): $30,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of Utah Pet Partners is improving human health and well being in partnership with therapy animals. We do this through recruitment, training, testing, mentoring, support and supervision of qualified volunteer human-animal teams. We do facility site assessment and professional training and volunteer service in a variety of settings as well community education re benefits of animals.

What it reported doing in 2025

UPP recruits, trains, tests, mentors and supports qualified volunteer Pet Partner registered animal/handler teams to provide animal assisted interventions to clients of all ages and income levels throughout Utah. Our dedicated staff assess and prepare facility sites for our teams, educating healthcare, social service, library and education professionals to effectively partner with the volunteer teams to enhance their client's therapeutic experience. Our specially trained teams provide over 5 thousand hours of volunteer service a year(an equivalent of over $120,700 of donated time)in hospitals and healthcare settings, mental health settings, shelters, schools, libraries, universities, and courts. In addition, UPP provides public education concerning the benefits of the human-animal bond in specific presentations, engages in research and special partnerships with educational instititions and human health professionals to explore the potential of animal-assisted therapy, and participates in workplace wellness events for a variety of high-stress businesses.

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 - 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56.9%; rating input score 57
  • Program expense ratio: 68.6%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.54 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 17.3%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.2; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30.7%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -8.9% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 56.9% of revenue deployed · 68.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $67K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $30K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 30/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.